Pakistan Case Law
1984 P Cr. L J 354

Syed MAZHAR ALIAppelicant vs ALI KHAN AND ANOTHERS

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1984 P Cr. L J 354
CourtSindh High Court
Case No.Criminal Miscellaneous Application No, 107 of 1981
Date1983-08-17
Judge(s)Z.C. Valiani
ResultProceedings quashed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter arises from a petition filed for the quashment of criminal proceedings pending under section 420 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 before the City Magistrate Nawabshah. The core legal questions involved whether the dispute between the parties was purely civil in nature regarding a dishonoured cheque, and whether a petition for quashment under section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 is maintainable without first approaching the trial court under section 249-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The court held that the contents of the complaint and preliminary statements disclosed only a civil dispute that could not result in a conviction, rendering the continuation of criminal proceedings an abuse of the court's process. Furthermore, the court held that where cognizance is taken after a preliminary inquiry, moving the trial court under section 249-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 would be a futile exercise, making the remedy under section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 directly maintainable. The petition was consequently allowed and the proceedings quashed.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether a petition for quashment of proceedings is maintainable under section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 without first moving the trial court under section 249-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
  • Does a dispute arising from a dishonoured cheque involving payment obligations constitute a criminal offence under section 420 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 or a civil dispute?
  • Does the continuation of criminal proceedings that cannot result in a conviction amount to an abuse of the process of the court?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
  • Section 249-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
  • Section 561-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
quashment of proceedingscivil disputedishonoured chequeabuse of processpreliminary inquirymaintainability

ORDER

1. ' The applicant abovenamed has filed the above petition for quashment of proceedings in the shape of Case No, 246 of 1980, pending against him, in the Court of City Magistrate Nawabshah, under section 420, P. P. C., on the facts and grounds mentioned in the above petition. The learned counsel for the applicant, in support of the above petition submitted as follows :-

(a) That from the contents of the complaint and the statement of the complainant and his witnesses, no criminal case whatsoever has been made out against the applicant, and at the most there is a civil dispute between the parties in respect of certain payment and consequently the cognizance taken by the learned trial Court, under section 420, P. P. C. Was unwarranted.

(b) That since the learned trial Court on the basis of the private complaint has taken cognizance no useful purpose will be served, if application under section 249-A, Cr. P. C. Is made before said Court, for quashment, specially in view of the facts of the present case, which clearly disclose a civil dispute between the parties. In support of this contention the learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon cases reported in 1982 P Cr. L J 1039 and Fazal Karim v. Muhammad Musaleen 1979 P Cr.

2. L J 921 and submitted that this is a fit case for quashment, in spite of the fact, that the applicant has not moved the learned trial Court under section 249-A, Cr. P. C.

3. ' The respondent No, land his Advocate have been called absent since morning and it is now 11. 35 p. m. And as such I have proceeded with the above matter on/merits as notice for today's hearing was sent to the learned counsel-for the respondent No, 1, as far back as 19th June, 1983.

4. ' The learned counsel appearing for the State submitted, that this is a fit case for quashment of the proceedings, as the dispute between the parties in respect of a cheque of Rs, 11,000 is a civil dispute and no criminal case has been made out either from the statement of complainant or from the statements of his witnesses, recorded in preliminary inquiry.

5. ' I have carefully considered the above submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and have gone through the private complaint, a copy of which is available on record, as well as statements of the complainant and his witnesses recorded by the learned trial Court. Mere reading of these statements and the complaint, in my opinion do not disclose any criminal offence committed by the applicant. It is very clear from the complainant's complaint and statement of the prosecution witnesses that this is a civil dispute, in respect of a dishonoured cheque, between the parties. The only point which requires consideration is whether the above petition is maintainable, as the applicant has not moved the learned trial Court under section 249-A, Cr. P. C., before coming to this Court. In this connection the learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon cases reported in 1982 P Cr. L J 1039, in which I have come to the conclusion, that in cases like this, where the cognizance is taken by the learned trial Court, after holding preliminary inquiry, moving of the application under section 249-A, Cr. P. C., at this initial stage would be futile exercise and the remedy available under section 561-A, Cr. P. C. In such a case would be available to the applicants.

6. The facts of the present case and one on which the learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon are more or less similar and in my opinion the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 1979 SCMR 96 would not be applicable to the above petition and, therefore, I hold that above petition is maintainable.

7. Keeping in view my above observation about the private complaint in question, both in respect of the complainant's statement and statement of the P. Ws. In my opinion the contents of this private complaint, before B the learned trial Court cannot result in conviction of the applicant and as such continuance of the said proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of the learned trial Court.

8. ' Therefore, I allow the above petition and quash the proceedings pending against the applicant, in the shape of Case No, 246 of 1980, under section 420, P. P. C., in the Court of learned City Magistrate, Nawabshah and discharge the bail bonds executed by the applicant.

Cited by 7 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.