IMAM BAKHSH BAQAR vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by the petitioner, who was a teacher serving as an invigilator during a Matriculation Examination and was accused of extorting money from a candidate in exchange for helping him cheat. The core legal question concerned the appreciation of evidence by the trial court and the High Court regarding the corruption charges supported by the testimony of a raiding Magistrate and the candidate. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that the concurrent findings of fact based on the credible testimony of the Magistrate and the candidate warranted no interference, especially since the petitioner had already received a lenient sentence. The petition was accordingly dismissed, affirming the conviction.
- Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with concurrent findings of fact based on the testimony of a raiding Magistrate in a corruption case?
- Can a teacher acting as an invigilator be held liable for extortion upon accepting tainted money from a candidate to facilitate copying?
ORDER
1. SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---The petitioner was a teacher in a middle school. On 2-7-1977 he was serving as an invigilator in the Government High School, Renala Khurd, where Matriculation Examination was being held. He allegedly extorted Rs,200 from a candidate with the promise of helping him in copying the answers. He was caught by a raiding party headed by a Magistrate with the tainted money. The trial Court as well as the High Court accepted the testimony of the Magistrate and the candidate and we see no reason for taking a different view in the matter. He has already been treated leniently in the matter of sentence. The petition is dismissed.