' This appeal is directed against the order dated 10-4-1983 passed by Special Judge, Anti- Corruption Multan camp at Muzaffargarh, whereby he acquitted the accused/respondents in a case registered against them under section 409, P.P.C. Read with section 5(2) of P.C.A. Vide F.I.R.
No,9 of 1976 dated 23-6-1976 at Police Station ACE Muzaffargarh.
2. Briefly stated the facts are that both the respondents were posted at the relevant time as Food Inspector and Food Supervisor Ali Pur respectively. On the report of Senior Auditor Abdul Hameed, they were found responsible for the misappropriation of 1873 bags weighing 5061 pounds 12 seers wheat out of stock at P.R. Centre Ali Pur' and such case was registered against them vide F.I.R referred above.
3. After submission of challan, the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption acquitted the accused/respondents vide order dated 10-4-1983. Hence this appeal.
4. Arguments heard and record perused.
5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for appellant that the trial Court passed the impugned order holding that there was no evidence available on record to connect the respondents with the commission of offence charged against them and two other persons stand involved for the said misappropriation of wheat, that this observation of lower Court is factually incorrect as there exists the statement of Abdul. Hameed, Senior Auditor, wherein he has impleaded the respondents for the commission of this offence, that trial Court should have allowed prosecution an opportunity to prove its case, that as such appeal may be accepted and case be remanded for disposal in accordance with law.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents contends that the alleged shortage attributed to respondents/accused pertains to 5-7-1974 as well as 28-7-1974, as per report of Mr. Abdul Hameed, Senior Auditor, that as per record both respondents were appointed on 19-6-1974, but they had taken over the charge on 5-9-1974 as is evident from charge report, that as such they cannot be held responsible for the said shortage, that even if the statement of Mr. Abdul Hameed is brought on record it will not improve the prosecution case and there will be no possibility of passing an order of conviction against respondents, that respondents have been undergoing the agony of incarcerated trial spreading over a period of more than two decades, that all these facts clearly show that impugned order does not suffer from any inherent defect/illegality as such appeal be dismissed.
7. The respondents have been sent up to face trial for the alleged misappropriation of 1873 bags of wheat, as per report prepared by Mr. Abdul Hameed, Senior Auditor of the department and whose statement has also been recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C. A perusal of this report shows that the said shortage had been detected by Haider AliD.F.C. And Abdul Ghani D.F.C. Vide their inspection reports dated 5-7-1974 and 28-7-1974. As per order available on file, both respondents were appointed as Food Inspectors on 19-6-1974 and they were directed to take charge from Khalid Naeem F.I. Jointly and which charge was handed over on 5-9-1974 vide charge report. Since the shortage had already been detected by Haider Ali and Abdul Ghani D.F.Cs. On 5-7-1974 and 28-7- 1974, so the question of causing misappropriation of 1873 bags on the part A of respondents does not arise. Thus, even if the statement of Abdul Hameed had been brought on record, it would have not made any difference and there was no probability of passing an order of conviction against the respondents. Again, it is fact that respondents are undergoing the agony of protracted trial spreading over more than two decades and this incarcerated trial has been a constant source of mental torture to them.
8. The upshot of above discussion is that impugned judgment does not suffer from any material illegality or irregularity as such the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.