1. ' By this consolidated judgment I intend to dispose of the above referred appeals which have been arisen out of common judgment passed by learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Sukkur.
2. ' The appellants through these appeals have challenged the judgment, dated 29-6-1991 .Passed by the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Sukkur in Special Case No,2 of 1981 whereby he convicted each of appellants for offence under sections 409, 420, 468, 471, 109, P.P.C. Read with section 5(2) of Act (II of 1947) and sentenced them to suffer R.I. For two months and fine of Rs,20,000 each. In default each of the appellants were directed to undergo R.I. For six months more, whereas co-accused Allah Warayo alias Haji Allah Warrayo and Haji Samano were acquitted by the learned trial Court.
3. ' The case of the prosecution as unfolded is that accused Abdul Sattar Shah in capacity as Chairman, accused Ghulam Hyder as Vice-Chairman and other private accused as Directors formed a Cooperative Society known as Sattar Multipurpose Cooperative Society Limited Pano Akil and under conspiracy and collusion with official accused in the name of Arbab Kalhoro, Arbab Shah, Illahi Bux Kalhoro, Hakim Ali Tatla, Khairdin Tatla, Behram Kalhoro, Abdul Muheeb Rajput, Ameer Shah, Bahadur Mahesar, Nabi Shah, Bakhsh Ali Kalhoro, Abdul Qadir Shah, Wahid Bux Kalhoro, Raza Muhammad Kalhoro, Sardar Shah and that of accused Haji Allah Warrayo, Abdul Sattar Shah, Ghulam Hyder and Abdul Razak prepared the forged record in respect of the cases of lessees/Khatedars and from Sindh Provincial Cooperative Bank, Sukkur, obtained loan of Rs,1,16,525 and Rs,16,775 by cheques dated 20-7-1978 and 27-6-1978 and they got the cheques cashed from National Bank of Pakistan Panoakil and misappropriated the amount by causing loss to the Government. The fraud was detected when Khair Din, Hakim Ali, Bakhsh Ali, Bahram, Illahi Bux, Juman, Arbab Shah addressed an application to Chief Martial Law Administrator Camp at Sukkur and copies to Deputy Martial Law Administrator Zone "C" Karachi, Deputy Commissioner, Sukkur, Superintendent of Police Anti-Corruption and Taluka Mukhtiarkar Panoakil, then by letter addressed to Manager Cooperative Society Bank at Sukkur demanded the particulars through bearer Tapedar Shafi Muhammad. Thereafter, the Manager supplied the details by sending photostat copies of Forms 17-A of loanees. Qn enquiry and verification, it revealed to Mukhtiarkar Panoakil that there was no such entry of mortgage in the Revenue Record for loanees. The signatures of Mukhtiarkar were forged and the details of the land were inconsistent with the Revenue Record. Mukhtiarkar Panoakil vide his letter dated 26-12-1978 apprised the Deputy Commissioner, Sukkur and prayed for taking legal action against the concerned. Deputy Commissioner, Sukkur vide letter, dated 7-3- 1979 forwarded a copy of application and report of Mukhtiarkar to Circle Officer, Anti-Corruption Establishment, Sukkur and directed for registration of a case. Mian Muhammad Hafeez, Circle Officer then recorded the F.I.R. Of this case and started the investigation. The investigation of this case was also conducted by Akbar Ali, Circle Officer. They secured the record and finally after completing the investigation, submitted the challan in the trial Court.
4. ' The trial Court framed the charge against the appellants to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
5. ' The prosecution has examined Arbab Ali Exh.13, Muhammad Azeern Exh.14, Arbab Shah Exh.15, Nabi.
6. Shah Exh.16, Bakhsh Ali Exh.17, Illahi Bux Kalhoro Exh.18, Bahadur Mahesar Exh.19, Muhammad Hafeez Arain Investigating Officer, Exh.20; Abdul Karim Indhar Exh.21, Ameer Ali Shah Exh.22, Sardar Shah Exh.23, Shafi Muhammad Bhutto Tapedar Exh.24, Illahi Bux Chahchar Tapedar Exh.26, Ali Nawaz Khaldi Exh.28, Ali Muhammad Samejo Tapedar Exh.29, Abdul Rasheed Shaikh, Senior Assistant N.B.P.
7. Exh.31, Muhammad Suleman Mughul Exh.43, Khair Din Jat Exh.44, Nisar Ahmad, Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies Exh.45, Munir Ahmad Soomro, Process-server Exh.72, Akbar Ali Arain, Investigating Officer Exh.80 and Moula. Dad Khan Rajput Handwriting Expert Exh.111.
8. ' All the accused in their 342, Cr.P.C. Statements denied the allegations. Accused Abdul Karim Shah besides denying the allegkions, stated that he was schooling and was going to, his village and due to Brothery dispute, he has been involved. Accused examined himself on oath. The accused persons also examined their respective defence witnesses.
9. ' The learned trial Court after hearing learned counsel for the respective parties convicted and sentenced the appellants as mentioned above.
10. ' I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record.
11. ' It has been contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that the judgment of learned trial Court is based on misreading and non-reading of the facts which has been placed before him during the course of trial. It has further been contended by him that the learned trial Court in its judgment that the main allegation was against accused Abdul Sattar Shah who is said to have been expired during the course of trial but the learned trial Judge convicted the appellants though they ought to have been acquitted. It has also been contended that the society was genuine society established under the provisions of Cooperative Societies Act, 1925, which was duly published in Government Gazette and the organized members raised funds for the betterment of its members who acted bonafidely, but due to personal grudge of Taluka Mukhtiarkar, Panoakil and Anti-Corruption staff at Sukkur registered the false case against the appellants. Learned counsel argued that the impugned judgment is in contravention of provisions of Cooperative Societies Act VII of 1925 in which special enactment and Special Procedure has been envisaged about the adjudication of any dispute arising in respect of the affairs of any Society formed according to the provisions of said Act. Section 43 of the said. Act, authorizes the Registrar of Cooperative. Societies to hold any enquiry into the constitution, working and financial condition of a Society. Likewise section 44 of the said Act, authorizes the Registrar to inspect the Books of any indebted Society or he may direct on the application of a creditor of a Society to inspect the Books. He further argued that the learned trial Court has bye-passed the provisions of sections 17-A, 43, 44, 44-A, 44-B, 50-A, 55 and 70-A of the Cooperative Societies Act, 1925 while passing the impugned judgment. He also argued that the appellants are dragging in this false case since 1981 without any fault and in that eventuality the learned counsel argued that it is a fit case where the appellants could be acquitted.
12. The counsel for the appellants have referred to the cases of Khanzada Hidayat Ali Khan v. Mazhar Ali Khan and others 1985 PCr.LJ 2871, Muzaffar Ali Shah and others v. Registrar, Cooperative Societies and another PLD 1968 Kar. 422, Pir Illahi Bux Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. v. K.B. Sanaullah and others PLD 1968 Kar. 680 and Quetta Cooperative Store Ltd. v. Province of Balochistan and 2 others PLD 1979 Quetta 760 in support of their contentions.
13. ' As against the arguments of learned counsel for the appellants Mr. Sher Muhammad Shar learned A.A.-G. Appearing on behalf of the State concedes the above legal position and has raised no objection if the appeals of the appellants are accepted and they are acquitted.
14. ' I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the respective parties, perused the record and I am of the considered view that the learned trial Court has violated certain provisions of Cooperative Act, 1925 inasmuch as the co-accused Sattar Shah the Chairman of the Society in question who was main functionary of the Society has expired during the trial, thus the appellants ought to A have been acquitted but they were convicted. The record reveals that the case against the appellants pertains to the year 1981 and they were convicted and sentenced in 1991 and since then they are dragging these appeals uptil now which period comes to be more than 22 years. Consequently, I allow these appeals, set aide the impugned judgments and the appellants are acquitted from the charge. The appellants are on bail, their bail bonds stand discharged.
15. ' Criminal Appeals Nos.68 of 1991, 69 of 1991 and 87 of 1991 stand disposed of.