SAJJAD HUSSAIN BHATTI Versus THE STATE

This criminal appeal arises from the judgment of learned Special Judge Central, Rawalpindi, whereby he on 3‑10‑1984 convicted Muhammad Iqbal appellant under section 161, P.P.C and section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. Under section 161, P.P.C. he was sentenced to 2 years' R.I. and a fine of Rs.1,000, in default thereof 3 months' R.I. and under section 5 (2) 47 to 3 years' R.I. and a fine of Rs.1,000, in default thereof 3 months' R.I. with the direction that the sentences shall run concurrently.

2. Since after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I feel inclined to set aside the convictions and sentences of the appellant on account of legal infirmity in the trial, I need not set out the facts in detail and enter into the merit of the case. I find that just after the raid, the Magistrate recorded the statement of the accused Exh. P.E., wherein he stated:

To my mind, this piece of evidence should have been put to the appellant when examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. Strangely enough, the trial! Court when examining the accused under section 342, Cr.P.C. did not care to put this piece of evidence and as such has failed to examined the accused properly. That being the position, there is no option but to set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant and send back the case for retrial from the stage of recording statement of the accused under section 342, Cr.P.C. Order accordingly.

M. A. K. Case remanded