UMAIR ASLAM vs STATION HOUSE OFFICER and 7 others

ORDER

' MUHAMMAD ANWAARUL HAQ, J.---Through this writ petition, the petitioner seeks the quashing of case F.I.R. No.322/2013 dated 13-7-2013 under section 406, P.P.C., registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Sialkot.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there is delay of more than two years in lodging of the impugned F.I.R.; that a false case has been registered against the petitioner; that from the contents of the F.I.R., offence under section 406, P.P.C. Has not been made out and registration of the present case against the petitioner is abuse of process of law; that dispute between the parties at the most is of civil nature and converting the same into a criminal case is not/permissible under the law; that there is no chance of conviction of the petitioner in this case, therefore, continuation of proceedings on the basis of the impugned F.I.R. Would be a futile exercise.

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.2/complainant contents that challan in this case has already been submitted before the court of competent jurisdiction declaring the petitioner guilty; that F.I.R. Reflects commission of a cognizable offence. Further contends that bare perusal of the F.I.R. Reveals that petitioner and his co-accused have deprived the complainant of a huge amount of Rs.16,00,000 and that it is a clear case of criminal breach of trust and cheating, and that mere delay of more than two years is not a ground to disbelieve the prosecution case.

4. Heard. Record perused.

5. The crux of the allegation has been summarized by the complainant in the F.I.R. Itself in the following words: {{URDU TEXT }} ' Learned Law Officer has frankly conceded that offence under section 406, P.P.C. Does not attract from the contents of the F.I.R. Against the accused. He, however, contends that as challan in the case has already been submitted, therefore, the accused may be directed to approach the learned trial court for their desired relief I am of the considered view that the impugned F.I.R. Does not disclose commission of offence under section 406, P.P.C. As there is no specific entrustment of money to any of the accused and there is a general allegation that all the accused, had received the money from the complainant. Even otherwise, the disputed amount of Rs.16,00,000 mentioned in the F.I.R. A if at all was given in the backdrop of a property deal and the accused are not ready for execution of the sale-deed, that is only a matter to be resolved by the civil court and the learned counsel for the complainant has frankly conceded that the complainant has not filed any such suit for specific performance against the accused in the F.I.R.

6. In view of all above, pendency of criminal proceedings on the basis of the impugned F.I.R. Is sheer abuse of process of law that cannot be allowed. Argument of the learned Law Officer that after submission of challan the petitioner can only approach the learned trial Court for redressal of his grievance is misconceived. The Hou'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Muhammad Aslam (Amin Aslam) and others v. District Police Officer, Rawalpindi and others (2009 SCM R 141) has observed as under:- "Framing of charge in the case by trial court does not debar burying of the proceedings by way of quashment. No invariable rule of law existed in this regard and it depended on the facts of each case whether to allow the proceedings to continue or to nip the same in the bud."

' Same principle has been followed by this Court in the case of Hafiz Muhanunad lqbal v. The State and another (2009 PCr.LJ 934) wherein while converting a constitutional petition into application under section 561-A, Cr.P.C., criminal proceedings pending before the trial Court were quashed. In another case of Dr. Nasir Ali v. S.H.O. Police Station Ghulam Muhammadabad Faisalabad and others (2006 PCr.LJ 1636), this Court has held as under:-- "For what has been discussed above it is quite clear that the contents of the impugned F.I.R. Do not disclose commission of the alleged offences by the petitioner. In these circumstances allowing the impugned F.I.R. To, continue to hold the field is to amount to an abuse of the process of law which cannot be allowed by this Court to be perpetuated. The writ petition is, therefore, allowed with no order as to costs and the impugned F.I.R. Is hereby quashed."

' Therefore, by allowing this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 read with section 561-A, Cr.P.C., the impugned proceedings in case F.I.R. No.322/2013 dated 13-7-2013 under section 406, P.P.C., registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Sialkot are quashed. Needless to add that quashing of F.I.R. Shall not affect the civil dispute, if any, between the parties in any manner whatsoever.