Shaikh Muhammad Akbar vs The State and another
The instant criminal miscellaneous application has been filed to question two impugned orders passed by the Judicial Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge respectively, through which the CNIC of the applicant was ordered to be blocked upon being reported as an absconder in Crime No. 06/2020 registered under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Mithadar. The core legal question concerns the legality of blocking an accused person's CNIC without initiating formal proclamation and attachment proceedings under Section 87 and Section 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The Sindh High Court held that adverse proceedings such as digitally impounding a CNIC cannot be taken unless it is established that the person is purposely and knowingly absconding, and specifically until proceedings under Sections 87 and 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 have been initiated and completed. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and NADRA authorities were directed to unblock the applicant's CNIC.
- Can the CNIC of an accused person be blocked without initiating proceedings under Section 87 and Section 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Whether adverse proceedings regarding the digitally impounding of a CNIC can be taken without establishing that a person is purposely and knowingly absconding?
- Section 489-F, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 87, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 88, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
FAHIM AHMED SIDDIQUI, J. Through instant criminal Misc. applica tion, the applicant has questioned two impugned orders i.e., (1) dated 02.03.202 0 passed by learned XIV-Judicial Magistr ate Karachi South and (2) dated 03.07.2020 passed by learned XI-Additional Sessions Judge Karachi South respectively . Through instant application, the applicant is seeking susp ension of order dated 02.03.2020 passe d by learned Judicial Magistrate for blocking CNIC of the applicant.
2. The case of the applicant is that he is involved in Crime No.06/2020 of PS Mithadar under Section 489-F PPC and subsequent to lodgment of FIR, a report was placed by I.O seeking blockage of CNIC of applicant on account of his becoming absconder . On such report, learned Judicial Magistrate passed initial impugned order whereby CNIC of the applicant was blocked. Such order was challenged but learned Additional Sessions Judge through second impugned order upheld the order of learned Judicial Magistrate.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and FIR was lodged against him regarding a transaction but the applicant remained unaware of such FIR as according to him, address mentioned in charge sheet is incorrect as the applicant is permanent resident of Gujranwala and presently residing at Lahore and both such addresses are very much available in his CNIC. He submits that I.O without bothering to approach to proper addresses of the applicant, has furnished a misconceived report before learned Judicial Magistrate due to which impugned order was passed. He further submits that CNIC of an absconding accused can only be blocked after declaring him absconder under initiating proceedings under Section 87 & 88 Cr.P.C. He categoricaly states that no such proceedings were ever initiated or completed against the applicant. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant intends to surrender before the trial Court but due to blockage of his CNIC, it becomes impossible for the applicant as his affidavit cannot be sworn by Identification branch of district court or High Court.
4. Learned prosecutor submits that a criminal case has been lodged against the applicant in which neither he has sought pre-arrest bail nor approached to I.O of the case with proper justification, however , he frankly conceded that no proceedings under Section 87 & 88 Cr .P.C have been initiated against the applicant.
5. I have heard the arguments and have gone through the entire material placed before me. It is a settled law that unless it is established that a person purposely and knowingly is absconding, adverse proceedings in respect of digitally impounding of his CNIC should not be taken place. In the instant case, since neither Judicial Magistrate nor trial Court has declared the applicant absconder by passing requisite order under Section 87 & 88 Cr.P.C; therefore, impugned orders appear to be passed harshly . Resultantly , both aforesai d impugned orders are set aside and NADRA authorities are directed to unblock/not digitally impound the CNIC of the applicant till further order , if any, passed by the trial Court in this regard. Instant Crl. Misc. Application alongwith pending application is disposed of accordingly.