S. A. NUSRAT, J.-This Criminal Acquittal Appeal is directed against the judgment of Special Judge- cum-Enquiry Officer, Hyderabad date( 8-2-1975, acquitting the respondent of alleged offence under section 40! Read with section 5(2) of the Act 11 of 1947.
2. According to the prosecution story, the respondent was posted as Secretary Town Committee at Hala during the years 1963 to 1965, whence he was transferred to Matiari. During the period of his posting at Hala, he came to recover Rs. 9,060 on account of public dues from various persons and it was alleged that the same was misappropriated by him. After necessary sanction, challan was submitted against the respondent in the Court of learned Special Judge-cum-Enquiry Officer and he was charged under section 409, P. P. C. And section 5(2) of Act 11 of 1947. The respondent denied the accusations.
3. The prosecution examined 10 witnesses in support of its case. According to Hyder, P. W. 1, who had audited the accounts of the Town Committee Halla, the defalcations in question came to be detected during the course of the audit. He produced the relevant books of account etc., and stated that the respondent had recovered the amount in question from the persons in whose favour the receipts were issued and which were signed by him. The amount of the receipts was entered in the demand register but corresponding entries were not made on the Credit side. The amount of certain receipts was also allegedly not shown in the Cash Register.
4. The learned Special Judge, who had the occasion of examining the relevant books of account, has mentioned in his impugned judgment that the said account books were maintained in a very shabby manner, the same presented a repulsive look and that it was difficult to say that those were account books at all. P. W. 1, who was the main prosecu--tion witness admitted that no signatures or initials appeared at the end of the receipt book, there was over writings over the dates and months, the receipt from Book No. 227 were issued by different persons, the Demand and Collection Register also did not bear the signature of any authority on any page and even the entries were not initialed by the Scribe. He further admitted that the cash book was not also signed by any authority and the Chairman never signed the same on any date. In the nature of such evidence, the learned Special Judge, came to the conclusion that the entire affair was doubtful and, in the circumstances, he acquitted the respondent by giving him benefit of doubt.
5. We have gone through the evidence from which it appears that the respondent had denied his signature on the receipt which were allegedly issued by him. The learned Special Judge closely examined the receipts and found that Khurshid P. W. 5, who produced receipts Exhs. 13 to 20 had belied the prosecution story by stating that the same were issued by the Munshi and not by the accused. Similarly P. W. 8 Muhammad Ramzan, who was issued Exh. 24, stated that the same was neither signed nor issued by the respondent. Prosecution witness A. Karim, who pro--duced receipts Exhs. 17 and 18 also stated that different persons used to issue receipts to him. Receipt No. 13 was in Sindhi and it was found that the accused could not write Sindhi. P. W. Lal Muhammad who was summoned to produce receipts Exhs. 16 and 21 did not support the prosecution because he did not say that the same were signed by the accused. Besides we find that the accounts of the town Committee in question were required to be maintained as provided in the West Pakistan Union Councils Account Rules, 1960. Rule 16 mentions that all the entries in the case book were to be checked by the Chairman item by item with reference to be receipts and vouchers and attested in token thereof. According to the Rules the Cash Book was required to be signed by the Chairman or any person authorised by him on his behalf daily but nonetheless the over all responsibility was that of the Chairman. The Rules 6 to 11 of the Rules of the West Pakistan Union Councils Account Rules, 1960, lay down the elaborate procedure of maintaining of accounts and looking to the nature of accounts, as discus--sed by the learned Special Judge in his judgment, it is clear that the accounts of the Hala Town Committee were all in a mess. Besides the respondent himself examined Mr. Aijaz Hussain, the then Chairman of the Town Committee who stated that no defalcations in the accounts were ever reported to him.
6. Mr. A. R. Qureshi, learned counsel for the State was unable to point out from the evidence anything to show that the prosecution; had succeeded in proving its case against the respondent and that the, impugned judgment, giving benefit of doubt to the respondent was, in the' circumstances, erroneous.
7. For the foregoing reasons we find no substance in this appeal which is dismissed.