M.A. KAZMI vs NOSHEEN and others
This matter comes before the Sindh High Court through a criminal acquittal appeal challenging an order passed under Section 249-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The core legal question is whether an order of acquittal under Section 249-A can be challenged in appeal, and whether the dispute in question warranted criminal proceedings. The court held that an order under Section 249-A cannot be challenged in appeal because the appellate court cannot convert an acquittal into a conviction when orders are passed without recording full prosecution evidence. Furthermore, the court held that the underlying dispute regarding an outstanding amount and recovery of money was civil in nature and that the FIR was lodged merely to create harassment, as the statements under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 did not support the FIR contents. The appeal was dismissed as being both not maintainable and without merit.
- Can an order passed under Section 249-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 be challenged in appeal?
- Whether a dispute over an outstanding amount and recovery of money is of a civil nature?
- Does an appellate court convert findings of acquittal into conviction when orders are passed without recording full prosecution evidence?
- Section 249-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 164, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. ' Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant as well as the respondents.
2. ' At the very outset, it may be observed here that the order passed under section 249-A, Cr.P.C.
3. Cannot be challenged in appeal as the Appellate Court would not be in a position to convert the findings of acquittal into conviction because normally these orders are passed without recording the full evidence of the prosecution. Reliance can be placed on a case of Muhammad Yasin v.
4. Muhammad Hanif and others 1997 PCr.LJ 1626.
5. ' Moreover, perusal of the impugned order reveals that statement of witnesses recorded under section 164, Cr.P.C. Did not support the contents of the F.I.R. Inasmuch as the witnesses disclosed that the incident took place four months prior to registration of F.I.R. Furthermore, the complaint itself showed that the dispute arose over the outstanding amount and recovery of money which is purely question of civil nature and the complainant just to create harassment for the respondents lodged the said F.I.R. Contents of which as stated above, are not corroborated by the 'statement of any of the witnesses recorded under section 164, Cr.P.C.
6. ' Accordingly, this Criminal Acquittal Appeal No,20 of 2004, in my considered view, merits dismissal being not maintainable as well as without merit.
7. ' By my short order, dated 24-5-2004 I had dismissed this criminal acquittal appeal and these are the reasons for the same.
8. ' Cr. Acq. Appeal No,20 of 2004 stands disposed of.