DIL AHSAN KHAN vs The STATE
This appeal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan concerns a challenge to the territorial jurisdiction of a trial court in Karachi regarding a criminal complaint filed against the appellant. The appellant, accused of misappropriating dowry articles, sought the quashment of proceedings under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, arguing that no offence occurred within the jurisdiction of Karachi. The core legal question was whether the Karachi court possessed the requisite jurisdiction to inquire into or try the complaint. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the trial court correctly exercised jurisdiction. The Court relied on Section 181(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, which stipulates that an offence of criminal misappropriation or criminal breach of trust may be tried by a court within whose local limits the property was received, retained, or the offence committed. Since the complainant alleged that the entrustment of dowry articles occurred in Karachi, the Court affirmed that the Karachi court had the legal authority to proceed with the matter, thereby upholding the High Court's decision.
- Does a court have jurisdiction to try a case of criminal misappropriation if the entrustment of the property occurred within its local limits?
- Can proceedings be quashed under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 solely on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction when the complaint alleges entrustment within that jurisdiction?
- Section 403, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 561-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 200, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 202, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 181(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ABDUL QADEER CHAUDHRY, J.---Leave to appeal was granted to the appellant to consider whether the Court at Karachi had the jurisdiction to try the complaint filed against the appellant. `
2. The facts, in brief, are that respondent Mst.Zaib-un-Nisa was married to the appellant m Karachi on 26-3-1974. The wife then accompanied her husband to Jhelum. She returned to the house of her parents in Karachi for delivery of child. The respondent came to know that her husband had contracted another marriage and also misappropriated the articles of dowry. A complaint under section 403, P.P.C. Was filed against the appellant. The appellant moved an application under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. For the quashment of proceedings in the High Court of Sindh which was dismissed on 24-4-1978. According to the appellant, no offence had been committed in Karachi, therefore, the Court at Karachi had no jurisdiction. The complainant m her complaint has stated that at the time of marriage the articles of dowry were delivered to the appellant and a list thereof was also supplied to him. The appellant did not return those articles to her and misappropriated the same. In her statement under section 200, Cr.P.C. She reiterated the same facts. She gave the list of articles which was attached with the complaint. The statements of her father Hayat Muhammad and a witness Amir Hussain were recorded under section 202, Cr.P.C. And they have also corroborated the statement of the complainant/respondent. According to section 181(2), Cr.P.C. "an offence of criminal misappropriation or criminal breach of trust may be inquired into or tried by a Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction any part of the property which is the subject of the offence was received, or retained by the accused person, or the offence was committed". As the allegation made by the complainant regarding entrustment was made at Karachi, therefore, Karachi Court has the jurisdiction.
The learned High Court after considering the facts of the case came to the same conclusion. The question of jurisdiction was only raised which was rightly decided. The appeal has no force. The same is dismissed.