Case Details

Citation(s)
2019 SLG 2059 2019 SLD 2059 2019 PLJ 721
Lahore High Court
Crl. Rev. No. 25 of 2012, heard on 25.03.2019.
FAROOQ HAIDER, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Mr. Shafi Muhammad Tariq, Advocate in person (on bail).
Respondent(s) by: Malik Mudassir Ali, Deputy Prosecutor-General Nemo

MUHAMMAD YOUNUS

VS

STATE ETC.

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 489-F

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 342,382B

Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860)-- ----S. 489-F--Dishonestly issuance of Cheque--Revision petition--Acquittal of--the impugned-cheque was pertaining to the obligation, which arose vide decision of Panchayat and said decision has been brought on record by the accused--On the one hand petitioner/accused was burdened with the liability with respect to this cheque and its encashment on a specific date, whereas in the same decision of Panchayat, it has been clearly mentioned that complainant shall also handover transfer letter of motorbike to the accused/petitioner till the same date, which scenario reflects that there were two obligations; one was upon the accused/petitioner while other was upon the complainant--These both arose at one and the same time, from one and the same document and ought to be fulfilled on or till one and the same date; these both obligations were not independent of each other, non-fulfilment of financial obligation imposed upon the accused/petitioner for making arrangements of sufficient funds for payment of the cheque, was also not imposing any criminal liability upon him for the purpose of invoking provision of Section 489-F, PPC--Investigating Officer was cross-examined in this regard, he admitted that fact of motorbike was mentioned in the said decision of Panchayat, however, he stated that he has not further investigated the said fact, which itself speaks about mala fide intention on his part--No criminal liability with respect to Section 489-F, PPC, can be fixed upon accused/petitioner--neither impugned-cheque nor memo. of slip was got exhibited/produced before the Court in original, so much so, their copies were even not got compared before trial Court by the prosecution with original in order to give them any name of exhibited documents for their admissibility in evidence--Both the said documents i.e. cheque and memo. of dishonouring the same, have not been put to the accused/petitioner u/S. 342, Cr.P.C.--Prosecution has been failed to prove its case against the petitioner and he is acquitted. PLD 2012 SC 380; 2018 SCMR 71; 2018 SCMR 153; 2018 SCMR 344 ref. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: FAROOQ HAIDER, JUSTICE---.--- Petitioner…
🔒
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