Manzoor Ahmed Akhtar vs The State
The petitioner, a Secondary School Teacher, challenged his conviction for using a forged High Court judgment to secure reinstatement and financial benefits following his earlier criminal conviction. After being reinstated based on the fake acquittal order, he faced prosecution by the Anti-Corruption Department. While a Special Judge convicted him on multiple counts, the High Court modified the judgment, setting aside convictions under Sections 409, 420, and 467 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, while maintaining others and adding a conviction under Section 466. The core legal question was whether the petitioner could escape criminal liability for using a forged document to secure employment benefits, particularly when a co-accused was acquitted. The Supreme Court held that the petitioner's disclaimer regarding the fake judgment was meritless, as he was the sole beneficiary of the fraud. The Court affirmed that the acquittal of a co-accused does not automatically invalidate the case against the principal offender where evidence distinctly points to his culpability. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition, finding no grounds to interfere with the lower courts' findings regarding the petitioner's guilt.
- Can a beneficiary of a forged judicial order disclaim knowledge of the forgery to escape criminal liability?
- Does the acquittal of a co-accused automatically invalidate the prosecution's case against the principal offender?
- Is a public servant liable for criminal charges when using a fake acquittal order to secure reinstatement and service benefits?
- Section 409, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 467, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 468, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 471, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 5(2), Prevention of Corruption Act 1947
- Section 466, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.---The petitioner , a Secondary School Teacher , was tried on a criminal charge that resulted into his conviction; guilty verdict, upheld throughout, alongsid e corporal consequences risked him his job as well. After his release, he successfully hoodwinked the department by presenting a fake decision of High Court of Balochistan, purporting to have acquitted him from the charge, as a consequence whereof, he was given posting again in the department with all benefits through condonation of absence period as earned leave. On an application, the Anti Corruption Depar tment initiated inquiry against the petitio ner and co-accused Nazeer , an office Superintendent, blamed to have facilitated him in betraying the public exchequer . A learned Special Judge acquitted the co-accused by extending him benefit of the doubt, however , convicted and sentenced the petitioner , as under: "Under section 409, P .P.C., 10-years' RI with fine of Rs.80,000/- Under section 420, P .P.C., 7-years' RI with fine of Rs.50,000/- Under section 467, P .P.C., 10-years' RI with fine of Rs. 80,000/- Under section 468, P . P.C., 7-years' RI with fine of Rs. 50,000/- Under section 471, P .P.C., 7-years' RI with fine of Rs.50,000/- Under section 5(2)47, P .C.A., 4-years' RI with fine of Rs. 50,000/- The High Court modified the judgment by setting aside petitioner's conviction under sections 409, 420 and 467 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, however , maintained the guilty verdict on the remainder charges with addition of conviction under section 466 of the Code ibid vide impugned judgment dated 9-8-2019, vires whereof, are being assailed on the ground that after prosecution's failure on the main charges, the only option available to the High Court was to record clean acquittal. It is further argued that acquittal of office Superintendent, indicted for being privy to the crime also demolished prosecution case qua the petitioner as well; he emphatically disowned the fake judgment. The learned Law Officer, assisted by Syed Abdul Baqar Shah, ASC, has faithfully defended the impugned judgment.
2. Heard. Record perused.
3. Petitioner's prosecution and his conviction on a criminal charge is an admitted position; the judgment on the basis whereof he managed his posting was found fake; it is on the basis thereof that the petitioner not only manipulated his service but also derived benefit thereof and, thus, his disclaim er regarding the fake judgment merits outright rejection; he cannot disown a fake judgment relating to the case wherein he was tried and convicted and, thus, being the sole and obvious A beneficiary now cannot escape consequences of ill-gotten gains; his treachery came into the knowledge of the Anti-Corruption Department when the co-villagers laid information of the mischief, paving way for his prosecution . Acquittal of office Superintendent, seem ingly out of abundant caution, does not tremof the charge, distinctly and inexorably pointed upon petitioner's culpability; he has rightly been convicted and sentenced and the findings recorded by the Courts below have not been found by us as open to any exception. Petition fails. Leave declined.