Prince SULEMAN DAUD vs Syed ABDUL QADIR GILANI and others
This matter concerns two petitions arising from a dispute over the interim custody of a vintage motor-car, a 1932 Pierce Arrow, allegedly belonging to the Khan of Kalat and historically associated with Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah. The core legal question addressed whether the High Court's order remanding the case to the Sessions Judge for determining interim custody remained relevant given subsequent developments. The Supreme Court observed that because the Sessions Judge, Kalat, had already passed an order regarding the interim custody pursuant to the High Court's remand, the petitions before the Supreme Court had become infructuous. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petitions. However, acknowledging the petitioner's concerns regarding the potential deterioration of the vehicle due to prolonged exposure at the police station, the Court clarified that the petitioner remains at liberty to approach the trial court (Sessions Judge) to seek appropriate orders for the proper care, maintenance, and preservation of the vehicle to prevent its damage pending the final disposal of the criminal proceedings.
- Does a petition become infructuous when the relief sought has already been granted by the trial court pursuant to a remand order?
- Can a party apply to the trial court for the preservation of case property to prevent deterioration during the pendency of criminal proceedings?
ORDER
1. ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.--These two petitions arise out of a theft case of motor-car Piers Arrow, Model 1932, bearing No, 3500084 which, according to prosecution case, belongs to Khan of Kalat.
2. The dispute between the parties has come up before us out of proceedings which relate to the question of interim custody of the motor-car pending final disposal of the criminal case in this regard. By the impugned judgment of the High Court, the case was remanded to the Sessions Judge, Mastung to adjudicate upon the question of interim custody of the motor-car after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to all concerned. Since in the meantime, the learned Sessions Judge, Kalat has passed the order dated 29-4-1989 pursuant to impugned order of the High Court, both these petitions have been admittedly rendered infructuous and are to be dismissed, but the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that ever since the registration of the case the motor- car is lying at the Police Station, and due to exposure to severe weather conditions it is liable to deterioration. He therefore prays that a direction may be issued to the trial Court for arranging a proper custody of the motor-car.
3. Since the petitions are being dismissed as having become infructuous, we would not like to pass any direction as prayed for. However, the fears expressed by the learned counsel with regard to the proper care and maintenance of the motor-car during the police custody may well be legitimate.
4. We therefore clarify that it is open to petitioner to apply to the learned Sessions Judge for such orders as may be deemed fit and necessary for obviating deterioration of the motor-car which is said to have been used by the Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah in 1942 and thus has a special value.