P L D 1961 (W (PLP)

Date of hearing: 7th June 1961. This is a joint appeal filed by Muhammad Nawaz and Ata Muhammad, against their conviction recorded by the Senior Special Judge Gujranwala, who has sentenced the former under section 409, Pakistan Penal Code to three years' rigorous imprisonment and the latter under section 409/109, Pakistan Penal Code, to one year's rigorous imprisonment.

2. The brief facts are that Muhammad Nawaz was a Chaukidar of the Forest Department, timber depot at Rasul Nagar in the area of Police Station Akalgarh. On or about 23rd of March 1958, he along with his co‑accused. illegally Sold 24 beams of 'timber at the rate of Rs. 17.00 per beam, to Ali Muhammad (P. W. 7) and Nazeer Ahmad (P. W. 8). Muhammad Nawaz had no legal authority to sell the timber. As soon as Ali Muhammad and Nazeer Ahmad had loaded the timber on the camels, Muhammad Aslam, a Forest Guard, checked them and he threatened to take them to the police station. Ultimately, he received Rs. 00.00 as bribe from Ali Muhammad and Nazeer, Ahmad and let them off, but he got back the timber and. placed it in the depot. Ali Muhammad and Nazeer Ahmad later on tried to get back the money they had paid to Muhammad Nawaz, but having failed to obtain it, 'they reported to the police on the 17th of April 1958, as a result of which the two accused were prosecuted and convicted as stated above.

2. The above case of the prosecution is supported by the following witnesses :‑ Muhammad Hussain (P., W. 1) who belongs to village Noinwala stated that his wife belongs to Rasulnagar and upon his visits to that place he came across Ata Muhammad appellant, who told him that in case anybody wanted to purchase timber on cheap rate, he could arrange it, Muhammad Hussain (P. W. 1) informed Ali Muhammad and Nazir Ahmad ' P. Ws. his co -villagers. After a few days all three of them came to Rasulnagar and met Ata Muhammad who promised to get them timber at the rate of Rs. 17,00 per beam. Consequently, after some time Muhammad Hussain, Nazir and Ali Muhammad P. Ws. hired six camels belonging to Abdullah (P. W. 2) Hasan Muhammad (P. W. 3) and all five of them came to Rasulnagar at about sunset along with six camles in order to purchase the timber. Muhammad Nawaz and Ata Muhammad sold 24 beams of timber to them. Rs. 408.00 the price of the timber was paid to Muhammad Nawaz. When they were about to leave with the timber, Muhammad Aslam forest guard stopped them and threatened to take them to the police station. In the alternative he demanded Rs. 500.00 as illegal gratification. Ultimately, he received Rs. 200 00 from them and let them go. The next day, Ali Muhammad approached Ata Muhammad for the return of the money, Ata Muhammad asked him to keep quiet assuring 'him that he would get the money refunded. He kept him putting off but ultimately refused to do anything: This may be mentioned here that Muhammad Aslam, forest guard, was separately tried by the same learned Senior Special Judge under section 61, Pakistan Penal Code, and section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, but he has been acquitted and the judgment has been placed on the record of this Court.

3. The learned counsel for the appellants argued that the evidence of these very witnesses has been disbelieved by the learned Senior Special Judge in the case against Muhammad Aslam, their evidence should not have been relied upon in convicting the present appellants. The learned counsel has failed to show as to how the findings in that judgment can be relied upon in deciding this appeal. Sections 40, 41, 42 and 43 o the Evidence Act deal with the relevancy of the judgments of the Courts of justice. The judgment in question does not fall within the abmit of sections 40, 41 and

42. According to section 43 of the Evidence Act, all other judgments are irrelevant unless the existence of such judgment, order or decree is a fact in issue or is relevant under some provisions of this Act. The argument of the learned counsel has thus no force. However, the accused deserves to be acquitted on the short ground that the evidence in this case consists of persons who are no better than accomplices and their evidence cannot be made the basis of a conviction unless it is supported by independent evidence on material particulars. Ali Muhammad, Nazir Ahmad and Muhammad Hussain quite well knew that a forest guard could not sell any timber from a Government depot. Abdullah and Bassan Muhammad, the owners of the camels, who had agreed to remove the timber from the depot, also very well knew that the timber was being illegally removed from a Govern ment depot. It stands proved from the evidence of Rana Nazar Muhammad, Range Officer, (P. W. 6), that a complaint had been made by Muhammad Aslam, forest guard, against these witnesses, that they had tried to steal timber from Rasulnagar depot. Ali Muhammad lodged the report in this case at a time when these persons were already being summoned by the forest department in order to investigate the complaint made against them by Muhammad Aslam, forest guard, a regards their attempt to steal the timber from the depot. The present complaint seems to have been made by Ali Muhammad P. W. in order to save his own skin. The inordinate delay with which this complaint was filed also points to the same conclusion. No convictions can be based on the evidence of witnesses who are no better than accomplices without independent corroboration. The appeal is, therefore, accepted and the accused are acquitted. They are already on bail, their' bail bonds shall stand discharged. K. B. A. Appeal accepted.