1985 P Cr (PLP)

2. Manzoor Ahmad appellant was Head Constable of Police. Muhammad Tufail appellant was a Sanitary Inspector, Municipal Corporation, Lahore The charge against them was that they demanded and accepted Rs.20C as illegal gratification from Muhammad Anwar P.W.1 for showing them favour in connection with encroachment checking. They denied the charge and claimed to be tried.

3. To prove its case prosecution examined 7 witnesses. Muhammad Akbar P.W.5 on 18‑2‑1980 was checking encroachments in the area of Baghbanpura, Lahore and imposing fines. Manzoor Ahmad appellant posting himself as Reader to the Magistrate demanded and accepted Rs.100 from him as an amount of fine. Manzoor Ahmad then demanded and received Rs.100 more from Muhammad Sharif, P.W.4 (uncle of the witness). On this Muhammad Akbar son of Miraj Din, P.W.2 told him that he could not be fined, as he was a license‑holder. The witness took the licence from his house and proceeded towards Magistrate when Manzoor Ahmad appellant met him on the way and returned Rs.100 to him. His uncle, however, asked him to get back the remaining amount of Rs.100 from Manzoor Ahmad appellant. Thereafter, he alongwith Akbar P.W. met the Magistrate and narrated the occurrence to him. The Magistrate summoned Manzoor Ahmad appellant who returned Rs.100 to him in the presence of the Magistrate. Muhammad Akbar son of Miraj Din P.W.2 supported the complainant. Muhammad Rizwan P.W. stated that on 18‑2‑1980, two persons complained to the Magistrate that someone had taken money from them. On the direction of the Magistrate, he stepped down from the Jeep when Akbar P.W. met him and told him that Rs.100 had been returned to him by Manzoor Ahmad, Head Constable. He reported the matter to the Magistrate whereon Manzoor Ahmad appellant gave Rs.100 to the complainant in his presence. Syed Shabbir Abbas, Magistrate, P.W.5 stated that he was checking encroachments on 18‑2‑1980 in the area of Baghbanpura, Lahore. When, he returned to Zonal Office‑II, someone complained that he had been charged with more money than the fine. He, then, summoned the parties to his Court for 19‑2‑1980. On that date Akbar complainant and Muhammad Akbar P.W.2 came to his Court and got their statements Exhs.P.W.1/1 and P.W.5/1 recorded. The rest of the evidence is not of much importance

4. When examined under section 342, Cr.P.C., the appellant denied all incriminating circumstances. In defence no witness was produced.

5. Mr. M. Zafar Chaudhry the learned counsel for Muhammad Tufail appellant submits that there being no incriminating evidence against his client, he was convicted without any "actual and legal justification Rana Abdul Majeed, the learned counsel for Manzoor Ahmad appellant raising preliminary objection stated that there being no valid sanction for the prosecution of his client, he could not have been tried by learned Special Judge, Anti‑Corruption, Conversely, the learned counsel for the State supported the judgment of the trial Court.

6. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I feel inclined to agree with the learned counsel for the appellants. So far as Muhammad Tufail is concerned after having examined the entire prosecution evidence I find that there is no direct or indirect incriminating evidence against him and as such , he could not have been convicted by the trial Court.

7. Coming to the case of Manzoor Ahmad appellant, I would like to reproduce the sanction order:‑ "WHEREAS, I, GHULAM HUSSAIN, Deputy Commissioner/ Chairman, Anti‑Corruption Committee No. III, Lahore have good reasons to be satisfied that Manzoor Ahmed, HC No.4985 while posted as such with the Corporation Staff of Zone No.2, L.M.C., being a public servant by abusing his official position and in his capacity as such public servant fraudulently and dishonestly demanded Rs.100 from Muhammad Akbar son of Muhammad Hussain, resident of Dhobi Ghat, G.T. Road, Lahore, as gratification other than legal remuneration as a motive or reward for showing him favour on account of checking of the licence of his shop by the Corporation Magistrate and obtained the said amount of Rs.100 then and there which he ultimately returned to the complainant Muhammad Akbar on his making of hue and cry that he was cheated without any fault on his part and thereby appears to have committed offence punishable under sections 161, P.P.C. and 5(2), 47, P.C.A. And whereas, after considering the facts constituting the said offences and other circumstances of the case, I am satisfied that the sanction for his prosecution is necessary and expedient. Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by the rules framed by the Governor of the Punjab under subsection (2) of section 12 of Pakistan Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1958 and notified with the Punjab Government SGA&ID Section S4' Notification No.SV.13‑2‑1980, dated 16‑6‑1980. I, Ghulam Hussain. Deputy Commissioner/ Chairman, Anti‑Corruption Committee No. III, Lahore, hereby, sanction under section 6(5) read with section 12(2) of the Pakistan Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1958, the prosecution of the above‑said Muhammad Tufail in respect of the offences specified above. Sd/? Chairman , Dated?????????????????????????? 1981??????????????????????????????????????? Anti‑Corruption Committee‑III, Lahore." The bare perusal of the order shows that in its operative part name of Muhammad Tufail instead of Manzoor Ahmad has been mentioned, and as such, the sanction order cannot be treated as a valid order for the prosecution of Manzoor Ahmad appellant. That being the position, the trial Court could not have taken the cognizance of the case against him. There is thus no option but to set aside his conviction and sentence. Resultantly, the appeal to the extent of Muhammad Tufail is accepted. He is acquitted of the charge. As far Manzoor Ahmad, his conviction and sentence is set aside and the case is sent back to the trial Court for fresh trial after obtaining valid sanction from competent authority. M.A.K.??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Order accordingly.