AFZAL HUSSAIN Versus STATE

ORDER

1. Applicant abovenamed has filed above petition for quashment of proceedings pending against him, in the Court of learned A.C.M. Kharadhar, under section 420/406, on the following facts and grounds:-

2. The facts of the case are so that in the month of June, 1978, the complainant of this case went to the office of the appellant Messrs Four sons, Room No.47, Badri Building, I.I. Chundrigar Road, Karachi, and bargained for Car No.077-724 Toyota Corrolla Model 1977. The price of the said car was told by the accused at Rs.54,000 and he received from the complainant a sum of Rs.48,000 and issued a receipt. The complainant of this case obtained delivery of the car whereupon he came to know that the said car was old and useless. Whereupon he returned the car to the accused and the accused amount or the car. However till date the accused had neither paid back the bargained amount nor had returned the car to the complainant. The accused by practising deception and by delivering useless car to the complainant obtained Rs.48,000 from him and also obtained back the said car and misappropriated the amount.

3. The learned Advocate for the applicant in support of the above petition submitted as under:-

(1) That from a bare perusal of the F.I.R. no offence is indicated.

(2) That the dispute giving rise to liabilities, if any, is of purely civil nature distorted into criminal prosecution with the only view to causing harassment to the applicant and to compelling him to meet the unjustified claim of the so-called complainant under police pressure.

(3) That keeping in view the attending facts and surrounding circumstances of the case, the ultimate conviction of the accused is not probable.

(4) That there was delay of 15 months in lodging of F.I.R, which has not been explained at all.

4. The learned Advocate appearing for the State at the outset submitted that he was supporting the above petition for quashment as there was delay of 15 months in lodging of F.I.R, which delay has not been explained at all by complainant and dispute between the parties is of civil nature.

5. I have carefully considered the above submissions made by the learned Advocates before me and have gone through F.I.R. and impugned order dated 7th March, 1981 passed in applicant's application under section 429-A, Cr.P.C.

6. It is admitted position that F.I.R. in question was lodged after; lapse of 15 months and no explanation for said delay has been given in F.I.R. Reading of F.I.R. clearly shows a civil dispute between complainant and applicant. In view of this, I agree with the contentions of the learned Advocate for applicant and State counsel Mr. Abbas Farooqi, that the case in question cannot lead to applicant's conviction and as such continuance of said proceedings will amount to abuse of the process of the learned trial Court, as facts disclosed in F.I.R. does not disclose even prima facie commission of offence under section 406/4201 P.P.C.

7. Therefore I allow the above petition and quash the proceedings[ against the applicant in respect of F. I. R. 114 of 1979 dated 15th October, a 1979 under section 406/420, P.P.C. in the Court of A.C.M. Kharadar, Karachi and discharge the bail bonds executed by applicant in the said case.

8. M.Y.H. Proceedings quashed.