Summary: NAB (Conviction upheld, As accused misappropriation of funds, fraudulently prepared fake bills against procurement of material, through Ghost Shop) --- The appellant, Altaf Ahmed S/O Gul Hassan Shaikh, represented by Mr. Nisar Ahmed Tarar, Advocate, filed an appeal against the State, represented by R.D Kalhoro, Special Prosecutor for the National Accountability Bureau (NAB). The appeal challenges the verdict dated February 28, 2018, by the Accountability Court-III, Sindh Karachi in Reference No.50/2015, which convicted the appellant under section 10 of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, sentencing him to seven years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.10,896,063. Failure to pay the fine would result in an additional year of imprisonment. The appellant was also disqualified from holding any public office or receiving any financial facilities from public sector banks or financial institutions for ten years following his conviction.The case originated from a complaint against TMA Sehwan Sharif officials regarding misappropriation of funds, leading to an inquiry and subsequent investigation by NAB. The investigation revealed that Altaf Ahmed Shaikh, while working as an electrician and falsely as a contractor, was involved in fraudulent activities, including the creation of fake bills and the illegal deposit of Rs.18,281,660 in his personal accounts.During the trial, the prosecution presented 11 witnesses and various documents to establish the appellant's guilt. The appellant, however, denied all allegations, claiming innocence and pointing out inconsistencies in witness statements. He argued that the evidence against him, particularly the banking documents, did not conclusively link him to the offense, suggesting that his identity was used fraudulently.The court, after reviewing the evidence and arguments, upheld the trial court's judgment, finding the prosecution's case against the appellant to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The appellant's plea that his identity was misused and that he was not involved in the fraudulent activities was not accepted by the court, given the lack of any initiative from his side to challenge or report the misuse of his identity after the case was filed. The court also noted the absence of any application from the appellant for the verification of signatures on the fraudulent documents, further weakening his defense.In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the trial court's decision based on the substantial evidence presented by the prosecution, which included both oral testimonies and documentary evidence. The judgment emphasizes the thorough examination and consideration of all aspects of the case by the court, leading to the affirmation of the appellant's conviction and the dismissal of his appeal.

Summary: Bail granted----A petition filed under Section 497 Cr.P.C. seeked post-arrest bail for Israr Hussain Shah in connection with a traffic accident case. The incident occurred, involving a collision between a Toyota Hi-Ace Van, allegedly driven by Israr Hussain Shah, and a ten-wheeler troller. While the petitioner was accused of reckless driving, the document highlights that the troller driver, Muhammad Saleem, was granted post-arrest bail earlier. The court observed that the primary cause of the accident appears to be the careless approach of the troller driver. The document interpreted the relevant penal provisions and concludes that the offense under section 322 PPC is bailable, allowing for the grant of post-arrest bail. The court considered various factors, including the absence of exceptional circumstances, the nature of the offense, and the fact that the Diyat (compensation) under section 322 PPC is payable in installments. Consequently, the court granted bail to the petitioner, directing his release upon furnishing bail bonds.

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: PLJ 2020 SC (AJK) 43 [Appellate Jurisdiction] Present Ch Muhammad Ibrahim Zia CJ and Ghulam Mustafa Mughal J MUHAMMAD MUNIR and 4 others - - Appellants versus INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AZAD GOVERNMENT OF STATE OF JAMMU KASHMIR and 125 others - - Respondents CA No 70 of 2018 decided on 932019 (On appeal from the judgment of the Service Tribunal dated 27122017 in Service Appeal No 2702009) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution 1974 (VIII of 1974) - - - - - - Art 42 (10) - - Issuance of promotion orders - - Communication of orders - - Departmental appeal - - Dismissed - - Appeal before service tribunal - - Dismissed - - Celebrated principle of law - - Limitation - - Challenge to - - Neither the appellants have specifically averred the date of communication of the impugned orders nor any other documentary proof has been brought on record - - Limitation for filing an appeal before the Service Tribunal shall be computed from the date of order aggrieved from whether original or appellate irrespective of pendency of any departmental appeal representation - - It is very astonishing that neither the counsel for the parties nor the Service Tribunal has bothered to apply judicial mind to scrutinize the record In the appeal before the Service Tribunal the order book No 186 dated 28012009 was also challenged through which the Respondents No 116 to 126 have been promoted To the extent of order dated 28012009 the appeal has been filed within time therefore dismissal of the appeal to this extent is un - warranted against law and facts - - Appeal partially accepted [Pp 45 46] A B C Mr M Maqsood Ahmed Sulehria Advocate for Appellants Sardar Karam Dad Khan Advocate - General and Sardar M R Khan Advocate for RespondentsJudgement Result:Appeal partially accepted