This criminal appeal arises from the judgment of learned Senior Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Punjab, Lahore whereby he on 25-5-1977 convicted Habib Ullah appellant under section 409, P.P.C.
And section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and setenced him to one year's R.I. On each count with the direction that the sentences shall run concurrently.
2. Neither the appellant nor his learned counsel entered appearance. Non-bailable warrants for the arrest of the appellant were issued which have been received back unserved. The District Magistrate has reported that the appellant is not traceable. In this view of the matter, there is no option but to proceed with the hearing of the case with the assistance of learned counsel for the State.
3. The appellant was a clerk in the office of District Education Officer, Gujranwala. The charge against him was that he received Rs,90 from three lady teachers namely Zeenat William, Mst. Ulfat Tahira and Mst. Rashida as admission fee for P.T.C., examination but did not deposit the same in the National Bank and criminally misappropriated the same. He denied the charge and claimed to be tried.
4. To prove its case prosecution examined 7 witnesses. Mst. Zeenat William P.W. 1, Mst. Ulfat Tahira, P.W. 2 and Mst. Rashida P.W. 5, the lady teachers, stated that Rs,90 were entrusted by them to Habib Ullah appellant for deposit as their admission fee for P.T.C., examination. Haroon P.W. 3 husband of Mst. Ulfat Tahira and Rev. William, father of Mst. Zeenat Wiliam also supported the allegations against the appellant. The rest of the evidence is of formal nature.
5. When examined under section 342 Cr. P.C., the appellant denied all the incriminating circumstances. He ,did not admit receipt of Rs,90 from lady teacheRs, In defence he produced Abdul Qayyum and Muhammad Hussain. They are Clerk and Head Clerk, respectively in the office of Deputy Education Officer (Women), Gujranwala. They stated that the lady teachers wanted to appear in P.T.C. Examination as private candidates. Since they did not deposit the admission fee in National Bank, therefore, roll numbers were not issued to them.
6. I have examined the evidence with the help of the learned counsel for the State. I find that from the statements of Mst. Zeenat William P.W. 1, Mst. Ulfat Tahira P.W. 2, Mst. Rashida P.W.
5. Haroon P.W. 3, and Rev. William P.W. 4, the entrustment of Rs,90 and its criminal misappropriation by the appellant is satisfactorily proved. They are independent witnesses having no motive to involve the appellant fasely. I do not see any inherent infirmity in their statement. The defence evidence is not strong enough to rebut prosecution case and its evidence. For all these reasons I am convinced that the trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant. The sentence awarded to him is also not excessive.
7. For what has been stated above, the appeal is dismissed. The trial Court shall issue warrants for the arrest and detention of the appellant to serve out the remaining sentence of imprisonment.