| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2013 SLG 1118 2013 SLD 1118 2013 PTD 821 (2014) 109 TAX 124 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No.6435 of 2009, heard on 21st January, 2013
IBAD-UR-REHMAN LODHI, JUSTICE
Mian Abdul Ghaffar for Petitioner. Muhammad Akhtar Qureshi with Syed Muhammad Ali Rizvi, Deputy Superintendent for
Respondents Nos.2 to 8.
Writ Petition No.6435 of 2009, heard on 21st January, 2013
IBAD-UR-REHMAN LODHI, JUSTICE
Mian Abdul Ghaffar for Petitioner. Muhammad Akhtar Qureshi with Syed Muhammad Ali Rizvi, Deputy Superintendent for
Respondents Nos.2 to 8.
MESSRS YASIR ENTERPRISES THROUGH CH. BASHER AHMED
VS
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY and 7 others
Law: Customs Act, 1969
Section: 169
Customs Act (IV of 1969)--Ss. 179 & 169---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 265-K---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Alternate remedy----Import of goods---Prevention of smuggling---Quashing of F.I.R.---Consignment of petitioner was seized, show-cause notice was issued, and simultaneously a criminal F.I.R. in relation to smuggling was registered against the petitioner---Order-in-original was passed against the petitioner which was set aside by Customs Appellate Tribunal on the ground that the same was in violation of S. 179(3) of the Customs Act, 1969 and entire proceedings against petitioner were declared void ab inito---Said order having not been assailed by filing of Reference within prescribed period of limitation had attained finality---Petitioner, inter alia, sought quashing of the F.I.R. registered against him whereas the Department contended that petitioner had an alternate remedy available under S. 265-K Cr.P.C., therefore Constitutional petition was not maintainable---Held, that when the show cause notice had lost any relevance and efficacy, it could not be expected that the criminal court, on the same facts and material, could take some other view---Proceedings under S. 265-K of Cr.P.C. could only be pressed if challan was pending and trial had commenced; which had not happened in the present case---Since trial had not commenced there was no occasion with the Trial Court to frame a charge, therefore, it could not be said that remedy under S. 265-K Cr.P.C. was available to the petitioner---Since matter had become redundant, it would be an illusion to send the petitioner to face trial and the case was fit and proper for exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court---High Court directed that F.I.R. against the petitioner be quashed as there was no possibility of conviction, since the matter had become redundant---Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances. JUDGMENT IBAD-UR-REHMAN LODHI, J.---The petitioner imported a consignment of 25 containers declared to be petroleum residue consisting of 3400 drums having net weight of 527000 kilograms from Jeddah Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. After taking…
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