SAMIUDDIN vs NADEEM AHMAD and 2 others
This petition was filed under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, seeking the quashment of an F.I.R. registered under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The petitioner challenged the criminal proceedings initiated against him regarding a dishonoured cheque issued to the respondent, arguing that the dispute was essentially civil in nature and that the F.I.R. was lodged with mala fide intent. The respondent contended that the dishonour of the cheque for insufficient funds constituted a clear criminal offence under the relevant statute. Upon review, the Court declined to quash the F.I.R., noting that the case had been registered following a proper inquiry and that the trial had already commenced. The Court held that it was inappropriate to interfere at this stage, emphasizing that the petitioner possessed alternative legal remedies. Specifically, the Court directed that the petitioner could seek relief by filing an application before the trial court under Section 265-K or Section 249-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, which would be adjudicated in accordance with the law.
- Can an F.I.R. be quashed under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 once the trial has already commenced?
- Is the remedy for a dishonoured cheque exclusively civil, or can it be pursued through criminal proceedings under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
- What is the appropriate procedure for an accused to seek acquittal during the trial stage if they believe the case against them is groundless?
- Section 561-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 489-F, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 156(3), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 265-K, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 249-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
' QAISER RASHID KHAN, J.---Through the instant petition under section 561-A, Cr.P.C, the petitioner Samiud-Din seeks quashment of the case F.I.R. No,549 dated 9-6-2012 registered under section 489-F, P.P.C. At Police Station Cantt: D.I.Khan.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 15-9-2011, Nadeem Ahmad, respondent No,1 submitted an application to the DPO. D.I.Khan for registration of case against the petitioner on the allegations that he had friendly business relations with the petitioner and that the petitioner had to pay a sum of Rs,24,00,000 to him for which, the petitioner issued a cheque on 15-10-2010 payable by the Bank of Khyber, D.I.Khan in favour of the respondent No,1 but it was dishonoured due to lack of fund in the account of the petitioner. The said application was marked to the S.H.O., Police Station Cantt: D.I.Khan who conducted an inquiry under section 156(3), Cr.P.C. And thereafter the F.I.R. Ibid was registered against the petitioner.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the F.I.R. Has been lodged against the petitioner with mala fide intentions; that the allegations contained in the application of the respondent No,1 constitute a civil liability for which the available remedy to him is the civil court anti not the criminal proceedings and that different criminal cases have been registered against the respondent No,1 as he is in the habit of committing fraud and cheating.
4. The learned D.A.-G. Assisted by private counsel for the complainant opposed the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and argued that the petitioner issued a chqeue for an amount of Rs,24,00,000 in favour of the respondent No,1 which on presentation, was dishonourerd by the concerned Bank for lack of amount in the account of the petitioner and thus, the F.I.R. Has rightly been registered against under section 489F, P.P.C.
5. Arguments heard and record perused.
6. As per the record, the respondent No,1 submitted an application to the DPO, D.I.Khan for registration of a case against the petitioner on the allegations that he had business relations with the petitioner and that the petitioner had to pay a sum of Rs,24,00,000 to him for which, the petitioner issued a cheque on 15-10-2010 payable by the Bank of Khyber, D.I. Khan in favour of the respondent No,1 which on presentation was dishonoured due to insufficient balance in the account of the petitioner.
7. Without commenting upon the merits of the case lest it may not prejudice the case of either party, suffice it to say that the F.I.R. Has been registered against the petitioner after proper inquiry and above all, trial in the case has commenced, therefore, at this stage, I do not see any reason to quash the F.I.R. However, the petitioner has the remedy to move an application before the learned trial Court under section 265-K Cr.P.C. Or section 249-A, Cr.P.C. As the case may be, which shall be'decided in accordance with law.
8. For the reasons mentioned above, there is no force in the instant petition which is hereby dismissed.
Cited by 1 case
- Dr. Shahzad Nasim vs The State & Others 2023 SHC 297