رشوت لینے اور دینے والا دونوں قانون کی نظر میں مجرم ہیں

 The upshot of the above discussion is that, subject to section 165-B PPC, both the bribe-giver and the bribe-taker can be prosecuted.

The question as to whether the bribe-giver should be able to recover his money from the bribe-taker is quite treacherous. In my opinion, the agreement to give the bribe and the one to return the benefit must be treated as separate and distinguishable, as held in the. A bribe-giver’s claim should be entertained only where the bribe-taker agrees to pay back, but not when no such agreement exists.

Respondent alleges that he paid Rs.150,000/- to the Petitioner to arrange for his appointment as a Senior Clerk at the Civil Secretariat through a source who was a public servant. This accusation is sufficient to bring the matter within the purview of section 163 PPC because it amounts to accepting a gratification “as a motive or reward for inducing, by the exercise of personal influence, any public servant to do or forbear to do an official act.” It is irrelevant whether the accused was, in fact, capable of doing the favour or not. The offence is committed if the bribe-giver believes he can do the favour and gives the bribe.

Writ Petition No. 58123/2022
Salman Mushtaq Vs. Ex-officio Justice of Peace etc.
Date of hearing 7 . 4 .202 3