2. Appraisal of evidence–Neither any conversation between the complainant and the accused before the tainted currency notes changed hands was heard, nor the actual passing of the same was witnessed by the raiding Magistrate and the Circle Officer, Anti-Corruption Establishment–Conviction of accused on the statement of the complainant alone, in the circumstances, was quite unsafe to base conviction on mere words of complainant–Accused was acquitted accordingly. PLJ 1996 Cr. C. (Karachi) 1999 Tainted money was not recovered from person of or on behest of appellant but was recovered from floor lying tit near feet of a third person and that too by complainant–Magistrate and Police Officer had not heard conversation between complainant and accused but they claimed to have seen complainant passing on tainted ha money to accused from a considerable distance which fact by itself =atom serious doubt about their said claim–Prosecution failed to prove charge against accused beyond reasonable doubt–Accused was acquitted. PLJ 1997 Cr. C. (Lahore) 896 Statements of complainant, Raiding¬ Magistrate and Sub-Inspector of Police, consistent on point of acceptance and recovery of tainted money from possession of accused – Accused also failed to rebut presumption that tainted money received by him from complainant as illegal gratification was not in fact as such–Conviction and sentence maintained, in circumstances.
Translate »Copy Protected by Chetan's WP-Copyprotect.