Another view of evidence

Accused was charged under S. 9(a)(iv) of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, for awarding contract for construction of a monument and Trial Court after recording of evidence acquitted the accused

Validity

None of prosecution witnesses stated even a single word against conduct, behavior as well as criminal intent of accused, if he ever had tried to oblige contractor in any manner while granting contract

No evidence was available on record in respect of any monetary benefit extended by accused in favour of contractor himself or he himself got any such illegal gains as a result of grant of contract

Charge under S. 9(a)(iv) of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, was rightly held not proved by Trial Court

Presumption of innocence was always in favour of accused at trial stage and when court of competent jurisdiction had passed order of acquittal, such presumption became double and to set aside the same unimpeachable evidence was required

Trial Court after applying its judicious mind acquitted accused and once judgment of acquittal had been passed by competent court of jurisdiction after proper and correct appraisal of evidence, same could not be interfered with merely on the ground that on re-analysis of evidence another view could be taken

High Court declined to interfere in judgment of acquittal passed by Trial Court

Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.