MUHAMMAD AYUB vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by Muhammad Ayub against the dismissal of his appeal by the Peshawar High Court, which had upheld his conviction and sentence under Section 161 of the Pakistan Penal Code read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The petitioner, a junior arms licence clerk, was tried and convicted by the Special Judge Anti-Corruption for demanding and accepting illegal gratification in the form of tainted currency notes during a trap laid by the anti-corruption staff. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the concurrent findings of guilt and the sentence imposed warranted interference and the grant of leave to appeal. The Supreme Court held that the petition lacked merit as the accused had admitted the finding of facts establishing his guilt, and the sentence awarded was appropriate. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition, establishing that leave to appeal will be denied where factual guilt is admitted and concurrent findings of lower courts are sound.
- Whether leave to appeal should be granted when the accused admits the finding of facts establishing guilt?
- Is a sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment under Section 161 of the Pakistan Penal Code and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 considered inadequate?
- Can concurrent findings of fact by the trial court and the High Court be interfered with where the petitioner admits the guilt?
- Section 161, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 5(2), Prevention of Corruption Act 1947
ORDER
1. ' S. USMAN ALI SHAH, J.---Muhammad Ayub petitioner a junior arms licence clerk at Abbottabad was tried by the learned Special Judge Anti-Corruption, N.-W.F.P. Peshawar Camp Abbottabad for the offence under section 161, P.P.C. Read with S.5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, for demanding of Rs,350 as illegal gratification/bribe from Abdul Wahecd complainant for the issuance of a licence of .12 bore shotgun and as such a trap was laid on 27-11-1986 and in consequence thereof he was arrested and tainted currency notes worth Rs,350 were recovered from his person by the Anti-Corruption staff. The learned Anti-Corruption Special Judge found the accused guilty of the offence, convicted him under section 161, P.P.C. Read with section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 and sentenced him to one year's R.I. With fine of Rs,500 or in default of payment of fine to suffer further RI for one month, vide his order dated 21-6-1989.
2. ' The accused petitioner filed appeal against his conviction and sentence before the Peshawar High Court, Circuit Bench Abbottabad, which was dismissed on 8-11-1989. The petitioner now seeks leave to appeal before this Court.
3. ' We have gone through the record of the case and findings of the Courts below in the light of the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner. We have come to the conclusion that this petition has no merit and needs dismissal straightaway. The accused has himself admitted the finding of facts with regard to the guilt established against him. The sentence awarded to him by the learned Special Judge Anti-Corruption, in our opinion, is not inadequate and has rightly been not interfered by the learned High Court. Thus, we, think it is not a fit case in which leave to appeal can be granted. The petition, accordingly is dismissed.