' This appeal under section 408, Cr.P.C. Has been filed by Zahoor Ahmad son of Muhammad Sarwar, who has been convicted under section 489-B, P.P.C. And sentenced to seven years' R.I. And a fine of Rs,5,000, in default of the payment of fine, to further undergo-six months' R.I. By Mr. Ahsan Maqsood Ghauri, Magistrate Section 30, Rawalpindi, vide the judgment, dated 21-3-1993.
2. Briefly, the facts of the prosecution case are that on 20-8-1992 at 12-00 a.m. One pair of shoes was purchased by the appellant for a sum of Rs,100 from the stall of Khawaja Farooq Ahmad complainant which is situated near Central Hospital Bus-stop at Murree Road, Rawalpindi. The appellant gave him a currency note for the denomination of rupees one thousand, which was suspected to be fake one. The complainant alongwith one Muhammad Siddiq caught hold of the appellant and produced before the police. The police took into possession the said currency note No,EO-670639 (Exh.1-A) vide memo, Exh.P.C. And lodged F.I.R. Exh.P.B./1 by the police.
3. To prove its case, the prosecution produced as many as four P.Ws. Iftikhar Ahmad Janjua P.W.1, Assistant Director Foreign Exchange State Bank of Pakistan examined the currency note and gave his opinion regarding fakeness of the said note and has stated that the alleged note for the denomination of one thousand was impounded by Islamabad police in a case.. Muhammad Rafiq, A.S.I./P.W.2 recorded the formal FIR. Exh.P.B./1, whereas Muhammad Ashraf A.S.I./P.W.3 investigated the case and challaned the accused. The complainant Farooq Ahmad appeared as P.W.4 and reiterated the contents of the F.I.R. As alleged by him before the police.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently contended that the said currency note was already impounded in another case by Islamabad police much prior to the registration of the case in hand, how the currency-note was removed from the case property, is the main argument of the learned counsel for the appellant. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State controverted the argument by contending that the accused is a police man though this fact has not been brought on the record.
5. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties at length and have perused the record with their assistance. The learned trial Judge observed that he has seen the currency- note during recording of the evidence on which the stamp of impound is very conspicuous. The prosecution as not brought any fact on record or evidence that how the currency-note was removed from the case-property of another case. The statement of P.W.3 and the complainant/P.W.4 regarding the investigation are contradictory on the police of drafting F.I.R., arrest of the accused/appellant and recovery of the currency-note from the appellant. Even otherwise, the complainant version is quite contradictory to the evidence on record. It was held in a case reported as Hamza and 2 others v. The State 1972 PCr.LI 478, that where the articles recovered are not sealed and packed at the place and time of recovery but at police station, such recovery is doubtful and cannot be relied upon. The factum of recovery of the currency-note has not been proved beyond any shadow of doubt and the appellant/convict is a police man. The learned trial Judge observed that the Investigating Officer has tried to give benefit to his counterpart, i,e, the accused is imaginary and without any evidence on record. Therefore, I am of the view, that the prosecution has badly failed to prove its case against the convict/appellant beyond any shadow of doubt and by any standard of evidence. As such, no reliance is placed on the statements of the eye-witnesses of the incident. Consequently, I accept this appeal, set aside the impugned judgment passed by the learned ' Magistrate, Rawalpindi, on 21-3-1993, and acquit the appellant from the charge framed against him. The C appellant is on bail. He stands discharged of bail bonds.