Hassan Din appellant has challenged his conviction and sentence to one year s R.I. And a fine of Rs.5,000 or in default thereof three months' R.I. Under s 165-A, Cr.P.C. Recorded by Senior Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Lahore vide order, dated 14-4-1990. Riasat Ali, Naib-Tehsildar (P.W.5) sent the appellant with the amount of Rs.3,000 through Safarash Ali, Constable (P.W.1) to Police Station Cantt., Lahore for registration of the case on the allegation that the appellant had tried to bribe him with the said amount in presence of Safarash Ali, Constable and Abdul Ghafoor, A.S.I. (P.Ws. 1 and 2) in connection with an enquiry of the appellant pending with him.
2. The appellant in his statement at the close of the trial pleaded that the enquiry pending with the Naib-Tehsildar had been stayed by the Civil Judge inasmuch as the civil suit had been decided in his favour. He claimed that he had only gone to the Naib-Tehsildar to inform him about the decision by the Civil Court, when he entered the Court the Naib-Tehsildar got enraged, asked him to leave and as he had stammer in his tongue, he asked the reason for it and the Naib-Tehsildar took it ill. He was, therefore, got arrested and money recovered from his person.
3. The prosecution examined Safarash Ali Constable, Abdul Ghafoor (P.Ws. 1 and 2) and Riasat Ali, Naib-Tehsildar (P.W.5). Their version was accepted by the learned trial Judge and conviction recorded.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the learned trial Judge did not take the trouble of applying his judicial mind to the evidence produced and with a pre-determined mind proceeded to record conviction. After hearing him and the learned counsel for the State and going through the record I am inclined to agree with him.
5. Riasat Ali, Naib-Tehsildar (P.W.5) stated that an enquiry of the appellant was pending with him, he reached him at 1-30 p.m. In his retiring room when Safarash Ali Constable and Abdul Ghafoor A.S.I. (P.Ws. 1 and 2) were sitting with him. The appellant raised hue and cry and threw currency notes of Rs.3,000 towards him. He stood up, handed over the appellant to the Constable and the A.S.I. Alongwith the currency notes to be taken for the registration of a case alongwith his complaint (Exh. P.B.). He was very definite in his cross---examination that the occurrence had taken place in his retiring room and denied the suggestion that he was outside his Court room, near the Malkhana when the appellant reached him and he exchanged hot words with him. He admitted that Mr. Nabi Ahmad, Civil Judge had called him and told him to stop the enquiry proceedings till the case was decided by him (the Civil Judge). He showed ignorance whether the Civil Judge had passed a decree in favour of tile appellant relating to the enquiry on 15-1-1986. He also denied that the appellant had told him that as the case had been decided in his favour, so why he (the Naib--- Tehsildar) was not concluding the enquiry. The statements of Safarash Ali' Constable and Abdul Ghafoor, A.S.I. (P.Ws. 1 and 2) are entirely contradictory to his version. Their case is that they were standing outside the Court near the Malkhana where the complainant Naib-Tehsildar was also standing, the appellant) reached there and offered the bribe money of Rs.3,000 to the Naib- Tehsildar. They did not say a single word that the occurrence took place in the retiring room of the Naib-Tehsildar. Furthermore, when the case had been decided in favour of the appellant by the Civil Court or in any case as admitted by the Naib-Tehsildar, the Civil Judge had called the Naib- Tehsildar and told him to stop the proceedings, there was no reason at all why the appellant should have walked' to the retiring room and conducted in such a manner as to have thrown the currency notes at the Naib-Tehsildar. In normal course if bribe had to be offered it had to be offered in a very polite manner.
6. I, therefore, accept the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence. The appellant stands acquitted. His money of Rs.3,000 be returned to him at once.