Haji MUHAMMAD LATIF vs FARMAN ALI and another
This petition for leave to appeal arose from a criminal case initiated by the petitioner against his nephew, the respondent, under Sections 379, 406, and 420 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, involving allegations of financial misappropriation and unauthorized removal of earth. Following the trial court's rejection of the respondent's application for acquittal under Section 249-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, and the subsequent dismissal of his revision petition by the Sessions Judge, the Lahore High Court allowed the respondent's application under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, quashing the criminal proceedings. The Supreme Court of Pakistan addressed whether the High Court's decision to quash the proceedings warranted interference. Upon noting that a parallel civil suit concerning the alleged loan was already pending and had been referred to arbitration, the Supreme Court held that the dispute was essentially of a civil nature. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition for leave to appeal, affirming that criminal proceedings should not be used to settle disputes that are fundamentally civil in character.
- Can criminal proceedings be quashed when the underlying dispute is essentially of a civil nature?
- Is it appropriate to maintain criminal proceedings for financial disputes that are already subject to pending civil litigation and arbitration?
- Does the High Court have the authority under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 to quash criminal proceedings if the matter is purely civil?
- Section 379, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 406, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 249-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 561-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. ' S.USMAN ALI SHAH, J.---Haji Muhammad Latif petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, dated 22-2-1989, arising out of a criminal case under section 379/406/420, P.P.C., the F.I.R. Of which was lodged by the petitioner against his nephew Farman Ali respondent No,1, wherein he alleged that six years before the registration of this case the petitioner got a total loan of Rs,5,40,000 on different occasions within six years from the petitioner. It was also alleged that the respondent No,1 had been removing earth from the land of the petitioner.
2. ' At the trial when the case was fixed for the statement of the accused respondent No,1 on 6-7-1986, he filed an application for acquittal under section 249-A, Cr.P.C. Which was rejected by the trial Court thereafter, his revision before the Sessions Judge also failed vide order dated 22-2-1989. His subsequent application under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. Before the High Court for quashment of proceedings was allowed vide judgment dated 22-2-1989, and the criminal proceedings pending against him before the trial Magistrate were quashed. The petitioner now comes up to this Court through this petition for leave to appeal.
3. The learned counsel for the respondent told at the Bar that a civil suit with regard to the loan is pending between the parties and on the mutual consent of the parties the matter has been referred to arbitration which on an appeal on technical point is pending before the High Court. The matter involved in this petition is purely of a civil nature, and the finding arrived by the learned High Court, needs no interference by this Court. The petition is dismissed. .
Cited by 4 cases
- MUDASSAR HASSAN RANA and 3 others vs The FEDERAL GOVERNMENT 2017 PLC (C.S.) 1342
- Mudassar Hassan Rana etc vs Federal Government etc 2017 PLC (C.S.) 1342, 2017 LHC 319
- ARIF RAFIQ vs THE STATE 1992 P Cr. L J 679
- MUSHARAF ALI Versus MUHAMMAD JAMIL 1992 MLD 591