25. Suspension Of sentence : Prayer for suspension of sentence u/S. 426 Cr. P. C. . – Material evidence through which prosecution sought to connect applicant, with commission of offence is in the shape of statements of I.O. and senior Auditor of PARC – When sanction of competent authority alongwith pre audited cheque and voucher, were placed before applicant as a co-Signatory, he under no authority could refuse to sign cheque and commence an inquiry about validity of transaction – There is another important aspect of matter – According to case of prosecution, misappropriated amount was traced and was shared by some other co-accused and not a single penny out of misappropriated amount, is either alleged or proved to have been received by applicant – Applicant admittedly was not member of purchase committee constituted for buying vehicles; he never took a decision from whom it should be purchased and for what price, all these decision were taken by other; he did not issue instruction to National Bank of Pakistan for preparing bank draft for further payment – Observation of learned Trial Court, that since applicant was picked for purpose of co-Signature in absence of a senior officer who has gone abroad and therefore, he is part of fraud, is prima facie conjectural and against evidence led – In afore-referred circumstances ex-facie, finding of learned Trial Court, that evidence goes to show that applicant having full knowledge with ulterior motive, had signed cheque is also not supported by any evidence – Learned Deputy Prosecutor General has failed to point out a single word in entire oral evidence of prosecution, to justify above conclusion of Court – A fit case for suspension of sentence

ajax loader