This criminal appeal arises from the judgment of learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption whereby he on 1-7-1979 convicted Sh. Asghar Ali appellant under section 161, P.P.C. Read with section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and sentenced him, to imprisonment till rising of the Court and a fine of Rs.1,000, in default thereof to further R.I.' for six months.
2. The appellant was tried alongwith Muhammad Siddiq co-accused. The charge against them was that they demanded and then accepted Rs.50 as illegal gratification. They denied the charge and claimed to be tried.
3. To prove its case prosecution examined three witnesses. Muhammad Ashfaq P.W.1 was produced to prove demand and acceptance of tainted currency notes as illegal gratification by the appellant and his co-accused. Masood Pervez S.I. Anti-Corruption, P.W.2 and Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Bajwa, Magistrate 1st Class, P.W.3 were produced to prove the acceptance of bribe by and the recovery of tainted currency notes from the accused. They supported the prosecution case.
4. When examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. The appellant denied all the incriminating circumstances. In defence he examined three witnesses.
5. The learned counsel for, the appellant submits that the prosecution has failed to prove that the appellant had accepted tainted currency notes as illegal gratification.
Conversely, the learned counsel for the State has supported the judgment of the trial Court.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for .The parties, I find that Muhammad Siddiq from whom the tainted currency notes were physically recovered has since been acquitted; that Muhammad Ashfaq complainant stated that the appellant had never demanded bribe from him; that the tainted currency note's were not recovered from the appellant; that since the Magistrate was sitting, at a distance of three yards from the appellant and the complainant, therefore, he was not in a position to say that the G.C. Notes were offered to the appellant and that the complainant in his examination-in-chief clearly stated:-- "Muhammad Siddiq accused (now present in the Court) would take record in the Court and that I should give this amount to him."
7. For what has been found above, I am of the opinion that it is doubtful that at any stage the appellant had agreed to accept G.C. Notes as illegal gratification for himself. Giving him the benefit of doubt, he is acquitted of the charge.
N.H.Q./A-110/L