ATHAR IJAZ KHAN vs STATION HOUSE OFFICER and others
This matter arises from a constitutional petition filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, seeking implementation of an order passed by the Ex-Officio Justice of the Peace directing the registration of a criminal case against respondent No. 2 based on the petitioner's application. The core legal question was whether the refusal of the respondent to return security cheques entrusted during employment constitutes a cognizable offence warranting police registration of a case, and whether a constitutional petition is maintainable when alternative civil remedies have been availed. The Lahore High Court dismissed the petition, holding that a breach of a promise, agreement, or contract does not ipso facto constitute criminal breach of trust under section 405 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, particularly where the cheques were given as security. The court laid down the principle that civil disputes regarding security cheques and contractual obligations do not automatically give rise to criminal liability, and a constitutional petition is not maintainable when the petitioner has already availed an efficacious civil remedy by filing a suit for declaration and permanent injunction.
- Does the breach of a promise, agreement, or contract ipso facto attract the definition of criminal breach of trust under section 405 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
- Is a constitutional petition maintainable for registration of a criminal case when the petitioner has already filed a civil suit concerning the same disputed subject matter?
- Does the retention of security cheques given during employment constitute a cognizable criminal offence where a civil dispute is pending?
- Section 408, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 22-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 22-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Article 199, Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
- Section 405, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 154, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' ABDUS SATTAR ASGHAR, J Petitioner joined as sales-officer with the marketing firm of respondent No,2 in the year 2007. Allegedly at the time 'of appointment petitioner issued two blank Cheques Nos. 0025937 and 0025943 of account No, 20403600000927 in favour of respondent No, 2 as security/surety. On 28-4-2014 respondent No,2 lodged FIR No,326/2014 under section 408, P.P.C. At Police Station Ichhra Lahore against the petitioner alleging criminal breach of trust and misappropriation of entrusted amount of Rs,9,00,000. As counterblast on 29-5-2014 petitioner lodged an application to the CCPO Lahore seeking registration of case against respondent No,2 alleging that aforesaid cheques were entrusted by the petitioner to respondent No,2 who has declined to return the same. Thereafter petitioner lodged an application under sections 22-A and 22-B, Cr.P.C. On 2-6-2014 before the learned Ex-Officio Justice of the Peace Lahore for registration of case against respondent No,2. The said application was allowed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace Lahore vide order dated 11-6-2014 with a direction to the S.H.O. To record the petitioner's version and proceed in accordance with law.
2. Petitioner's grievance through this constitutional petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 is that despite order of learned Ex-Officio Justice of the Peace Lahore S.H.O. Police Station Ichhra is not inclined to record his statement under section 154, Cr.P.C.
To register the case against respondent No,2.
3. Arguments heard. Record perused.
4. Petitioner's own version that the impugned cheques were given by him to respondent No,2 as security/surety to the employment negates his version that the same were entrusted to respondent No,2. It is established principle of law that breach of any promise, agreement or contract does not ipso facto attract the definition of A criminal breach of trust in terms of section 405, P.P.C. Reliance is made upon Shahid Imran v. The State etc. 2011 SCM R 1614 (Supreme Court of Pakistan). In the attending circumstance of this case prima facie no cognizable offence is made out.
5. Besides it is important to note that petitioner has lodged a suit for declaration with permanent injunction before the Civil Court Lahore with regard to the disputed cheques which is pending adjudication. Petitioner has already availed the efficacious remedy.
6. For the above reasons, this petition being not maintainable is dismissed.
Cited by 1 case
- Young's (Private) limited and others vs Province of Sindh and others. 2019 PTD 389, PTCL 2018 CL. 881