REFIQUE SAIGAL vs P.I.A. and others
This matter originated as a review petition against a Supreme Court order dated 15-12-1980, which had previously set aside a High Court order quashing a criminal complaint filed under sections 409, 420, and 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The appellant, a director of a company involved in a travel agency business, challenged the prior dismissal of their appeal, contending they lacked notice of the hearing date and were engaged in legal proceedings in Karachi on that day. The core legal question was whether the appellant had been duly notified of the hearing and whether the dismissal of their appeal was justified given the alleged lack of notice. Upon reviewing the record, the Court observed that the appellant’s Advocate-on-Record had been explicitly informed of the hearing date on the day it occurred, yet failed to take any steps to request an adjournment or communicate with the Court. Consequently, the Supreme Court held that the appellant had sufficient notice, and finding no merit in the review petition, dismissed the appeal.
- Can a review petition be maintained when the applicant fails to demonstrate a lack of notice for the original hearing?
- Does the knowledge of an Advocate-on-Record regarding a hearing date constitute sufficient notice to the party represented?
- Is a party entitled to relief in a review petition if they fail to take any action to request an adjournment upon learning of a scheduled hearing?
- Section 409, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 561-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 202, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
1. ' S. USMAN ALI SHAH, J---This appeal by leave of the Court in criminal Review Petition No,2-R of 1981 is directed against the order of this Court dated 15-12-1980, whereby Criminal Appeal No,16-P of 1973 of the respondents against the order of the Peshawar High Court dated 16-2-1971, passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No,37 of 1969, was allowed in their favour.
2. ' The appellant with the 5 respondents were directors of the Company known as Messrs Khyber Express Limited and was carrying on the business of travel agents of P.IA. At Nowshera. The amount collected for the freight and sale of the tickets by the said company were cheques (i,e. Cheque CAX 622571, 622575 and 623762) all worth Rs,3,64,707.40 for payment to the respondent No,1 at United Bank Limited, Lahore Branch. On presentation all these cheques were dishonoured and thus a complaint under section 409/420/109, P.P.C. Was filed againset the appellant and the 5 respondents in the Court of the District Magistrate, Peshawar. An application under section 561-A of the Criminal Procedure Code for quashment of the respondent No, l's complaint against them was filed by the appellant in the Peshawar High Court and the learned Single Judge vide his order dated 16-2-1971 allowed the application. Respondent No, 1 filed a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court which was granted to examine the question in view of the law declared by this Court in "Ghulam Muhammad v. Muzammil Khan" PLD 1967 Pesh.
317. In appeal the order of the High Court being without jurisdiction was set aside and the District Magistrate Peshawar was directed to issue fresh notice under section 202, Cr.P.C. To the appellant and the 5 respondents who were allowed to raise the points advanced in the High Court or any other plea that will be available to them under the law.
3. ' The appellant submitted an application for review to the effect that they have no knowledge for the case fixed for 15-12-1980 and according to the learned counsel it was on the said date i,e.15-12- 1980 that he became aware at Kara through Mr. Noori Advocate-on-Record of P.I.A.C. And was told by the said A.O.R. That the case has been heard in Peshawar on the same date.
4. ' The learned counsel for the appellant before us reiterated the same arguments that on 15-12-1980 he was arguing a case at Karachi when he was made aware there at Karachi by Mr. Noori AOR of the case fixed for hearing of the appeal by this Court at Peshawar. On the other side Mr Bilal learned counsel for the respondent No,1 questioned the maintainability of this appeal and referred us to a power of attorney of the Advocate-on-Record i,e. a green sheet on page 32 of the file alongwith an application of enter appearance. The power of attorney bears a note of this Court dated 15-12-1980 with the following words:- '
5. "This appeal is fixed for hearing before the Court at Peshawar today the 15-12-1980. Mr. M. A.
6. Siddiqui, Advocate-on-Record has been informed of this position which was noted by Mr. MA.
7. Siddiqui on the same date i,e. 15-12-1980."
8. Similarly, the enter appearance application also carry the note to the same effect of the same date i,e. 15-12-1980.
9. The learned counsel for the appellant was questioned that what steps he or his client took after the power of attorney was filed whereupon he was told that the case is fixed on that date i,e. 15-12- 1980. The learned counsel have no reply and failed to explain as to whether he tried to intimate through telephone or telegram to this Court at Peshawar on 15-12-1980 requesting for adjournment or likewise.
10. ' Under the circumstances, there is no merit in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed.