Case Details

Citation(s)
2020 SLG 1167 2020 SLD 1167 2020 MLD 964
Sindh High Court
Criminal Revision Application No. 213 of 2018, decided on 16th February, 2019.
SALAHUDDIN PANHWAR, JUSTICE
Khawaja Muhammad Azeem and Ms. Sadia Khatoon for Applicant. Waseem Akhtar, Assistant Attorney General for
Respondents.

BASHIR AHMED BADAL

VS

THE STATE AND 2 OTHERS

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 345

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 406,420

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 345---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 406 & 420---Compounding of offence---Criminal breach of trust, cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property---Scope---Accused who was convicted under Ss. 406 & 420, P.P.C., filed compromise application---Contention of accused was that offence under S. 406, P.P.C. was not made out from the facts of the case---Validity---Allegation against accused was that he and co-accused cheated the complainant on the assurance of arranging visa for umrah, which allegation fell within the meaning of cheating, punishable under S.420, P.P.C.---Punishment under S. 406, P.P.C. was not tenable and the same was set-aside by the High Court---Parties had affirmed the contents of compromise application and had further affirmed that the same was voluntary---High Court accepted the compromise application and acquitted the accused---Criminal revision application was disposed of accordingly. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 406---Criminal breach of trust---Ingredients---Scope---Offence of criminal breach of trust would not constitute unless ingredients thereof including "voluntary entrustment of property "and" its subsequent misappropriation" are not co-existing. (c) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 345, 435 & 439---Compounding of offence---Revisional jurisdiction---Scope---High Court can, while exercising jurisdiction, competently entertain application for compounding the offence. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: SALAHUDDIN PANHWAR, JUSTICE:---.---At the outset learned counsel for applicant contends that complainant and accused have entered into a compromise whereby grievance of complainant is redressed hence they have filed compromise application; complainant, who is present in Court, has no objection if same is accepted and the accused is acquitted from the charge. It is further contended that applicant is nephew of present applicant who is in custody; admittedly ingredients of section 406, P.P.C. are not attracted and section 420, P.P.C. is compoundable hence instant compromise application. It is pleaded by the DAG that application for compromise may be directed to be…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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