Pakistan Case Law
1972 SCMR 118

SAEED ZAKARIA vs THE STATE AND Another

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1972 SCMR 118
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Criminal Appeal No. K-3 of 1971
Date1972-02-21
Judge(s)Sajjad Ahmad, Waheeduddin Ahmad and Salahuddin Ahmed
Authored bySalahuddin Ahmed
ResultSentence modified
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This appeal by special leave challenged a High Court order that had convicted the appellant under Section 409 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for criminal breach of trust, reversing an initial acquittal by the trial court. The core legal question concerned the appropriate sentencing in light of the appellant's offer to make full restitution for the misappropriated funds. The Supreme Court of Pakistan maintained the conviction but exercised its discretion to modify the sentence. Holding that the appellant's commitment to repay the entire misappropriated amount warranted leniency, the Court reduced the term of imprisonment to simple imprisonment until the rising of the Court. The Court further imposed a fine of Rs. 17,000, directing that Rs. 16,600 be paid as compensation to the complainant department and the remaining Rs. 400 be paid to the State Treasury. This judgment establishes the principle that in cases of criminal breach of trust, full restitution of misappropriated funds by the accused may be considered a mitigating factor for the reduction of a custodial sentence.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Can a sentence for criminal breach of trust be reduced if the accused makes full restitution of the misappropriated funds?
  • Does the Supreme Court have the authority to modify a sentence imposed by the High Court in a criminal appeal?
  • Is simple imprisonment until the rising of the court a permissible sentence for an offence under Section 409 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 409, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
criminal breach of trustsentencingrestitutionmitigation of sentencemisappropriationspecial leave to appeal

ORDER

1. SALAHUDDIN AHMED, J.-This appeal by special leave is from an order of a Division Bench of the former High Court of West Pakistan. Karachi Bench, convicting the appellant under section 409 of the Pakistan Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for 12 months and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000 and in default of payment of fine, to suffer further imprisonment for one year. This conviction was made on an appeal filed by the State from an order of -acquittal passed in favour of the appellant by the trial Court: The total amount said to have been misappropriated by the appellant as a Clearing Agent is Rs.

2. 16,600. The appellant having agreed to repay the entire amount misappropriated by him has today offered to pay the said amount as well as any other sum that may be required to be paid by him.

3. The learned Assistant Advocate-General, Sind, Mr. Usman Ghani Rashid, has agreed to the proposal of the appellant. The occurrence took place some time in the year 1962. We accordingly make the following directions modifying the sentence imposed upon the appellant.

4. While maintaining the conviction of the appellant under section 409 of the Pakistan Penal Code we reduce the sentence, of imprisonment passed on him to simple imprisonment till the rising of the Court. We impose a fine of Rs. 17,000 (Rupees seventeen thousand) and direct that out of this amount a sum of Rs. 16,600 be paid to the complainant department, namely, the Government Weaving and Finishing Centre, Shahdara and the balance of Rs. 400 (Rupees four hundred) be paid as fine to the State. The appellant has produced the entire amount in Court and the learned Assistant Advocate-General has received the entire amount. The learned Assistant Advocate- General will remit the amount to the Government Weaving and Finishing Centre, Shahdara and to the State Treasury in the proportion stated above.

Cited by 4 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.