Pakistan Case LawM/s. MTM INTERNATIONAL BEARING INDUSTRY LTD. Versus AIZAD HASAN and
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which quashed criminal proceedings initiated against the respondents under sections 500 and 506/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The proceedings were quashed by the High Court under section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 after the Magistrate had issued process but before evidence was recorded. The petitioner contends that the High Court erred in quashing the proceedings at such an early stage, arguing that the determination of whether the respondents' actions—specifically the issuance of a letter containing imputations to the Central Board of Revenue—were bona fide or mala fide requires the recording of evidence. The Supreme Court, finding merit in the petitioner's submission that factual disputes regarding intent cannot be resolved on bald allegations without evidence, granted leave to appeal to consider whether the High Court's interference was premature and legally justified in the circumstances.
- Can criminal proceedings be quashed under section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 before the recording of evidence when the issue of intent is in dispute?
- Is it appropriate for the High Court to determine the bona fides of a party's actions based solely on pleadings without recording evidence?
ORDER
WALI MUHAMMAD KHAN, J.---M/s. M.T.M. International Bearing Industry Limited, petitioner herein, calls in question the judgment dated 20-3-1993 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, whereby the proceedings initiated against Aizad Hasan and others, respondents 1 to 3 herein, under sections 500 and 506/34, P.P.C. Through a complaint were quashed under section 561-A, Cr.P.C.
2.We have heard Mr. Jawahar Naqvee, Advocate, for the petitioner, and have perused the record of the case.
3.Admittedly, the learned Magistrate before whom complaint was filed, after recording preliminary evidence of the complainant, issued process against the respondents which prompted them to move the High Court for quashment of the proceedings without waiting for the recording of evidence in the case. It appears from the perusal of the impugned judgment of the High Court that the respondents did not specifically controvert the factual allegations made by the petitioner regarding the issuance of letter to the Central Board of Revenue containing the imputations against the petitioner. It is strenuously argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the intention of the respondents in issuance of the aforementioned letter as to whether they were bona fide or mala fide could only be properly gone into after some evidence had been recorded in the case and no positive finding was possible on the bald allegations and counter-allegations of the parties.
4.Leave is granted to consider the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Judges on this bench
- Ajmal Mian2,984 judgments
- Wali Muhammad Khan585 judgments