| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2006 SLG 474 2006 SLD 474 2006 PLD 19 |
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 104 of 2005, decided on 30-9-2005. DATE of hearing: 23rd September, 2005
IJAZ-UL-HASSAN KHAN, J
Muhammad Saleem Khan Toru for Petitioner. Muhammad Saeed Khan, Addl.A.G. for the State
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 104 of 2005, decided on 30-9-2005. DATE of hearing: 23rd September, 2005
IJAZ-UL-HASSAN KHAN, J
Muhammad Saleem Khan Toru for Petitioner. Muhammad Saeed Khan, Addl.A.G. for the State
E.F.U. GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY through Representative
VS
THE STATE
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 516-A,517,561-A
Law: Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
Section: 17(3)
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 324,381A,411,420
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 516-A, 517 & 561-A---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.324, 381-A, 411 & 420---Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S.17(3)---Superdari of vehicle---Application for---Petition for quashing of order---Motor car in question having been stolen, F.I.R. was lodged by its purchaser and car was taken into possession by the Police---Petitioner-company moved an application before Judicial Magistrate for `Superdari' of car on the basis that petitioner being an Insurance Company, having paid insurance amount to its owner, had locus standi for possession of car---Said application was rejected and criminal revision against order of Judicial Magistrate was also dismissed by the impugned order---Car in question was insured with petitioner-company for a period of one year---Courts below had failed to take into consideration the fact that after payment of insurance amount and obtaining "subrogation", petitioner-company was lawful owner of the same---Nothing was on record to show that car was used in commission of crime with the knowledge of petitioner-company---Insurance Policy and "subrogation" placed on file would prima facie show petitioner-company to be the owner of car in question at least in the absence of any rival claimant---Apart from that, retention of car in police custody for an indefinite period would also serve no useful purpose---Impugned orders were set aside with the direction that custody of car in question should be delivered to duly authorized representative of the petitioner-company on Superdari. JUDGMENT IJAZ-UL-HASSAN KHAN, J.---E.F.U. General Insurance Company through its representative Muhammad Ahmad Noon has filed instant quashment petition under section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Act V of 1898), against order dated 10-2-2005 and 23-5-2005, passed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate and the Additional Sessions Judge, Peshawar, in case of `superdari' of a Motor Car bearing Registration No.STG-5501, Model 1993. 2. Briefly stated the facts are that the Motor Car in question along with its registration book was stolen from Rawalpindi, where F.I.R. No.200…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492