Case Details

Citation(s)
2021 SLG 2210 2021 SLD 2210 2021 PLJ 161
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Crl. P. No. 1198 of 2020, decided on 16.11.2020, Date of hearing: 16.11.2020. (Against the order dated 12.10.2020 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Misc. No. 31391-B of 2020 and Criminal Misc. No. 42701-B of 2020)
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE, MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, JUSTICE
Mr. Shamim-ur-Rehman Malik, ASC and Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, AOR for Petitioner. Mr. Baleegh-uz-Zaman, ASC for the Complainant along with Complainant in person. Mirza Abid Majeed, DPG for State.

AHMAD ALI

VS

STATE AND ANOTHERS

Law:

Section:

ORDER Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Indicted under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, the petitioner, was returned a guilty verdict by a learned Magistrate at Islamabad vide dated 26.11.2019; he was sentenced to 3-years rigorous imprisonment, maintained throughout. 2. According to the prosecution, the petitioner issued a bank cheque in the sum of Rs. 30,50,000/- to Muhammad Irfan complainant towards payment of sale consideration of a vehicle, bounced upon presentation. 3. Besides the witnesses, prosecution adduced documentary evidence comprising photocopies of the impugned cheque and bank slip, duly verified by Zulfiqar Ali ASI (PW-3) from Bank Manager Mansoor Ali who appeared before the Court as PW-1 to confirm the transaction. Agreement Ex.PC is also part of the record to establish purchase of complainant’s vehicle by the petitioner. Petitioner confronted prosecution evidence with an unsubstantiated plea of innocence with copies of applications moved by the complainant to the Excise and Taxation Officer Islamabad confirming the transaction in retrospect. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, after disputing production of photocopies of the bounced cheque and bank slip, alternately pleaded for the reduction of sentence to the period already undergone, a request contested by the learned Law Officer with the assistance of learned counsel for the complainant. Conceding production of photocopies, the learned Law Officer argued that Investigating Officer had verified the documents as true copies of the originals, required in a summary suit for the recovery of amount under Order XXXVII of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908; it is further argued that the bank manager confirmed presentation of the instrument and, thus, prosecution successfully established the issuance of a cheque from petitioner’s account towards fulfillment of a financial obligation and its failure upon presentation. Adverting to the plea for reduction of sentence, the learned Law Officer presented details of no less than five other cases of identical nature pending in different Courts to argue that the petitioner being an habitual offender was not entitled to any leniency. 5. Heard. Record…
🔒
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