IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Criminal Acquittal Appeal No.S-27 of 2006

Appellant                      :         State through Advocate General Sindh,

Through Mr.Sharafuddin Kanhar, A.P.G           

Respondent No.1                   :         Arbab Ali son of Abhoro Soomro

Through Mr.Safdar Ali Ghouri, Advocate                  

Date of hearing             :         04.10.2018          

Date of decision              :       04.10.2018                   

JUDGMENT

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- The appellant/State by way of instant Criminal Acquittal Appeal has impugned the acquittal of private respondent, recorded u/s.249-A Cr.PC, by learned Special Judge Anti-Corruption (Provincial) Larkana vide order dated 28.01.2006,

2.                The facts in brief necessary for disposal of instant criminal acquittal appeal are that it was alleged by complainant Sikandar Ali Metlo that he was having the landed property in Deh Rato Kot, Taluka Qamber, when he was minor, his father Ghulam Mustafa being gambler by practicing fraud sold the same to co-accused Imdad Ali, by obtaining sale certificate from the private respondent being Tapedar of above said Deh. After usual investigation, the case was challaned before learned trial Court. The private respondent and co-accused Imdad Ali did not plead guilty to the charge and the prosecution to prove it, examined PW-01 complainant Sikandar Ali at Exh.07, produced through him his application and FIR, PW-02 Irshad Ali a clerk from office of Sub Registrar Qamber at Exh.08, produced through him photo stat copy of sale deed, PW-03 Tapedar Haji Mehmood at Exh.09, produced through him photo stat copy of record of right. Then the private respondent and co-accused Imdad Ali were acquitted u/s.249-A Cr.PC by learned trial Court, such acquittal only to the extent of private respondent is impugned by the appellant/State before this Court, by way of instant acquittal appeal.    

3.                It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant/State that the learned trial Court has recorded acquittal of the private respondent without lawful justification, ignoring the fact that the investigating officer of the case was yet to be examined. By contending so, he sought for remand of the matter with direction to learned trial Court to proceed further.

4.                Learned counsel for the private respondent has sought for dismissal of the instant criminal acquittal appeal by contending that remand of the matter would serve no purpose, as the acquittal of the private respondent has been recorded by learned trial Court on merits.

5.                I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

6.                The FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about 17 years; such delay could not be lost sight of. The acquittal of co-accused Imdad Ali the beneficiary has not been impugned by the prosecution, which appears to be significant. If it is believed that the private respondent issued a sale certificate in respect of landed property owned by the complainant on the basis of record of rights, then it hardly constitutes an offence against him, as he by doing so discharged his lawful duty as public servant. The fraud, if any, was committed with the complainant by his father Ghulam Mustafa. In these circumstances, the learned trial Court was right to record acquittal of the private respondent of the offence for which he was charged by making a conclusion that the examination of remaining witnesses would culminate no conviction.

7.                In view of the facts and reasons discussed above, it could be concluded safely that no justification is advanced which may call for making interference with the impugned order by way of instant acquittal appeal, it is dismissed accordingly.

J U D G E

..