Muhammad Ali Patwari was convicted by Senior Special Judge Anti---Corruption, Lahore vide judgment, dated 5-3-1990 for an offence under section 471, P.P.C. And sentenced to 9 months' R.I.
And a fine of Rs.1,000 or in default thereof three months' R.I. He was acquitted for the offences under section 420/468, P.P.C. He has appealed.
2. Abdul Aziz (P.W.3) moved an application (Exh.P.W.3/A) to Additional Director, Anti-Corruption, Lahore. On it formal F.I.R. (Exh.P.A.) was registered under sections 420, 468 and 471, P.P.C. And section 5 of Act II' of 1947 (Prevention of. Corruption Act).
3. The allegations in the complaint were that the appellant was posted as Revenue Patwari in Tehsil Ferozewala. He had passed his Matriculation Examination in 3rd Division and was overage when he joined service but he produced a fake certificate of having passed the examination in 2nd Division with date of birth different than the actual one to get the employment. It was further alleged that he had only three acres of land when he joined service but now he had created huge property in the name of his wife Mst. Zaitoon daughter of Abdul Hakim by amassing wealth through illegal means.
4. The appellant at the close of the trial stated that he had produced the attested photo copy of his Matriculation Examination (Exh.P.D.) before Sabir Ali (P.W.4) with his date of birth as 2-9-1947 having passed the Examination in third division. He also claimed that he had produced the original, the copy thereof was retained and the original was returned to him. He further asserted that his relative Ellahi Bakhsh got him recruited but then developed enmity due to land dispute and falsely got him involved in the case by changing the' entries and documents in his service record as he was posted as District Accounts Officer, Sheikhupura. He claimed that entries in Exh.P.C. Were in his (Ellahi Bakhsh's) hand. He also made statement on oath. In his statement on oath he informed the Court that he was recruited as candidate Patwari on 14-11-1969 vide order (Exh.DA.) a written examination was held in 1971 at Faisalabad which he qualified vide certificate (Exh.D.B.) and was appointed a regular Patwari in the year 1974. Ellahi Bakhsh, the husband of his cousin's sister was posted as Accounts Clerk in the Office of District Accounts Officer, Sheikhupura, got him the regular job of Patwari. He was also informed that if the relaxation of age was required he (Ellahi Bakhsh) would get it done. He stated that Exh.P.C. Was filled in by Ellahi Bakhsh in his own hand. He further informed the Court that he purchased land from Fazal Ahmad, maternal-uncle of Ellahi Bakhsh, the father-in-law of Ellahi Bakhsh filed a pre-emption suit with respect to it and on account of this purchase Ellahi Bakhsh got him involved in the case falsely. He also stated that he had passed Matriculation Examination under certificate (Exh.P.D.) and he had produced the same before the Investigating Officer. In cross-examination he told that he had not got the age relaxed. He admitted his signatures on the medical certificate (Exh.P.C.) but asserted that he had put his signatures on blank paper and given it to Ellahi Bakhsh. He told that he had never informed the Department that he was overage or that he was under-Matric. He denied that at the time of joining service he had produced certificate (Exh.P.W.2/B).
5. The prosecution produced Muhammad Fazal, S.D.C, (P.W.1) who stated that due to heavy rains in 1986 their record was damaged when the building collapsed and the personal file of the appellant could not be traced. Abdul Rashid, Head Clerk (P.W.2) deposed that he had produced attested copy of the Matriculation certificate of Muhammad Ali appellant (P.W.2/A) before the investigator.
The Matriculation certificate in original (Exh.P.W.2/B) was with him and he had produced it before the police from the service book (Ex.P.W.2/C). In cross-examination he admitted that in the service book there was no application for recruitment of the appellant. Abdul Aziz complainant (P.W.3) stated that the appellant passed his Matriculation examination in third division, got a forged certificate showing second division and at the time of appointment as Patwari he was 30 years of age but showed him under-age. From his cross-examination it is clear that he was only a child when the appellant joined, service and did not know when he had passed his Matriculation examination. He admitted that Ellahi Bakhsh was married to his sister and the appellant was also their relative. He also admitted that Ellahi Bakhsh and the father of the appellant were first cousins.
He further admitted that he and Ellahi Bakhsh had strained relations with the appellant and his father-in-law Abdul Hakim since about 2/3 years. He was candid enough to say that previous to that Ellahi Bakhsh and he had good relations with the appellant. He also admitted that Ellahi Bakhsh was employed in Accounts Branch of District Accounts Officer, Sheikhupura since long. He showed ignorance whether Ellahi Bakhsh had got the appellant recruited. He also said that he had never seen the certificates of the appellant himself. He also admitted that in- the year 1986 before he moved application to the Anti---Corruption Department the appellant and his father-in-law Abdul Hakim had got registered cases against him and other family members at Police Station Bhai Pheru and one case was under section 324, 148, 149, 506, P.P.C. For causing injuries to Abdul Hakim. He also stated that the land of their uncle Fazal Ahmad was purchased by the appellant and since then their relations were strained. Sabir Ali Qureshi (P.W.4) is the investigator. He did not check up the record of the University or Board as to the age or the division of the appellant in the Matriculation Examination. Abdul Karim, Headmaster (P.W.5) stated that according to his school record the date of birth of the appellant was recorded as 2-9-1947. He could not say who had obtained the certificate (Exh.P.F.) in this regard. He was not having the Admission and the Withdrawal Registers of the School.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant, in view of the above evidence, contended that no record of the University or of the Board as to the Matriculation Examination of the appellant had been taken into possession nor examined by any of the witnesses and so it cannot be said that he had obtained a fake certificate for employment. In certificate (Exh.P.W.2/B) the date of birth of the appellant is shown as 2-9-1952, in his service book (Exh.P.W.2/C) his date of birth is again recorded as 2-9-1952. He was appointed as Patwari w.e.f. 22-10-1974. In medical certificate (Exh.P.C.) he was opined as 24/25 years by the doctor though he himself had given his age as 23 years on 10-3-1976.
In photostat copy of Secondary School Certificate Examination for the year 1965 the appellant's date of birth is recorded as 2-9-1947. Where is the original of it, is not made clear. The certificate of the Headmaster (Exh.P.F.) does not indicate when the appellant was admitted in the school and when he was discharged. The original record was also not produced by the Headmaster. Thus from these documents it cannot be said as to what actually was the date of birth of the appellant or under what admission form and when he passed his Matriculation Examination and whether he had produced any fake certificate while getting the employment. The complainant is clearly inimical to the appellant since 2/3 years when the appellant purchased some land from his uncle- and there was pre-emption suit against it and then there were criminal cases between the parties.
The charge cannot be said to have been proved against the appellant from this evidence beyond any shadow of reasonable doubt.
7. The appeal is, therefore, accepted. The conviction and the sentence of the appellant are hereby set aside. He is on bail and stands discharged of the bail bonds.
H.B.T./M-3088/L