The State Vs Tehsil Khan

JUDGMENT SHEET

IN TIIE PESHAWAR HIGH COURT,

BAI\NUBENCH

(Judicial Department)

Cr.A.No. 91-8/2025

The State

Yersus,

Tehsil Khan

IUDGMENT

For appellant: Mr. Naieeballah Khan Manoat Asstt: A.G,

For respondents: Mr. Inomullah Khan Kah*i advocate.

Date ofhearing: !q1!2Q}!

M(IHAMMAI| TARIO AFNDI. J.- The State, through the Advocate General, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, has filed this appeal under Section 417 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, against the judgment dated 23.01.2025, passed by the leamed /a Special Judge, Anti-Comrption, Southem Districts, Camp Court at Kohat, whereby the accused/respondent in case FIR No. 01 dated 17.10.2022, tegistaed under Section 16l PPC at Police Station ACE, Distict Lakki Marwat, was acquitted of the charge.

2.As per contents of the FIR, on 17.10.2022 at about 12:00 noon, the complainant, Hidayatullah, in the premises of District Courts, Lakki Marwat, reported the matter to Mr' Shafiq-ur- Rehman Circle Officer, that on l4.l\'2022, the leamed Civil Judge, Naurang, in his case, directed for documentatiorr of his

'Fard.' For this purpose, he approached the accused, Tehsil Khan, Patwari Circle MavzaNar Sultan, Muqarab Khan, who

allegedly demanded illegal gratification of Rs.10,000/- and fixed 17.10.2022 for delivery of the "Fard." The complainant expressed unwillingness to pay illegal gratification except govemment fees and volunteered to act as a trap witress. Mr. Shafiq-ur-Rehman the Circle Office, ACE reduced his report into writing in the form of Murasila @x.PW-3/l) and sent it to Police Station ACE, Lakki Marwat, through Constable Khalid Khan for registration of the FIR. On his request the learned District and Sessions Judge, Lakki Marwat, appointed the leamed Senior Civil Judge, Lakki Marwat, to supervise the trap proceedings.

3.The complainant, carrying two marked cllrency notes of Rs.5,000/- each bearing identifiable initials, entered the offtce of the Patwari Circle. Upon handing over the same to the ? accused, the trap team entered, arested the accused, and recovered the marked curency notes from his front pocket. A 'Fard" and atlested copies of the judgment rendered by the leamed Civil Judge, Naurang, in Civil Suit No.123ll of 2019 were also seized vide recovery memos Er.PW-212 and Ex.PW- 2l3.lJpon completion of investigation, a complete challan was submitted before the Court. Upon appeaxance of the accused, copies of relevant documents were delivered to him in compliance with Section 265-C CI,P.C. Where-after, a formal charge was framed on 05.11.2024' to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution produced four witnesses. During proceedings, however, the defence moved an application under Sections 249-A and 265-K Cr'P'C' for acquittal. The leamed tial court, after hearing arguments of the leamed counsel for the parties, vide judgment dated 23.01.2025, acquitted the accused/respondent, hence this appeal.

4.The learned Assistant Advocate General and leamed counsel for the accused/respondent were heard at length, and with their assistance, the rccord was carefully examined.

5.It is evident from the record that the accused./respondent was charged with demanding illegal gratification of Rs.10,000/- from the complainant for preparation of a "Fard" required for his case. The raid was conducted by the leamed Senior Civil Judge @W-04), companied by the Circle Officer, ACE, and the complainant. The raid report, Ex.PW-4/I, reveals that no statement of the complainant was recorded either before or after the raid. Likewise, no statement of the accused was recorded after recovery of the currency notes to determine whether the amount had been received as illegal gatification or for some other purpose. The raiding magistate (PW-04) was bound to record the version of the complainant on the spot after the recovery; failure to do so casts serious doubt on the proceedings. In these circumstances, it cannot safely be concluded that the said amount was received by the accused as illegal gratification.

6.Mr. Shafiq-ur-Rehman, Circle Officer, appeared as PW- 03, and Mr. rlamid Kamal, Senior Civil Judge, appeared as PW-04. witnesses, during stated that they neither saw the handing over the tainted culrency notes to the accused, nor heard any convenntion between them. In such circumstances, the prosecution failed to establish the purpose for which the money was given, whether as b,ribe, as repayment of debt, or for any other reason.

7 . In cases of this nature, the statement of the complainant holds central importance. However, the complainant failed to appear before the trial court despite repeated summons, the

v issuance of non-bailable warrants, and even house search conducted to secure his attendance. His persistent absence casts serious doubt on the authenticrty of the allegations and renders further continuation of prosecution proceedings a futile exercise.

8.In view of the above, this Court finds that recording of any further prosecution evidence would have served no useful purpose, as there remained no reasonable likelihood of securing a conviction against the accused/ respondent. The leamed trial Court correctly appreciated the evidence and invoked the provisions of secti on 249-A Cr.PC to the accused/ respondent. Its findings are well reasoned and warrant no interference.

9.It is a settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that once an accused earns acquiftal from the trial court, a double presumption of innocence is attached in his favour. The appellate court, while examining an appeal against acquittal, is always slow in reversing such a finding unless it is shown to be arbitrary,fanciful, capricious, or based on a glaring misreading or non-reading of evidence. No such infirmity is found in the impugned judgment. The learned trial court has rightly acquitted the respondent/accused by invoking the provisions of Sections 249'A and265-L Cr.P.C.

10.For the reasons discussed above, this appeal, being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed.

Announced.

''. l.:rrlll ('..\

IUDGE

(cN{ED 2 (s.8/ Hon'ble Mr. Justice MuhamnadTartq Afridi