Case Details

Citation(s)
2020 SLG 1920 2020 SLD 1920 2020 MLD 1803
Sindh High Court, Sukkur Bench
Criminal Acquittal Appeal No. S-6 of 2018, decision Dated: 21-10-2019
AFTAB AHMED GORAR, JUSTICE
Muhammad Arif Malik for Appellant/Complainant. Aftab Ahmed Shar, Additional PG for the State.

ABDUL KHALIQUE

VS

SHAHBAZ AHMED AND ANOTHERS

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 489-F

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 417(2A)

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 489-F---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.417(2-A)---Dishonestly issuing a cheque---Appreciation of evidence---Appeal against acquittal---Root cause of the dispute in between the appellant and the accused was the transaction of sale of sugar---No documentary proof was produced by the appellant in his evidence with regard to the said transaction had claimed that accused had issued the cheque of Rs.9,50,000/---Bank Manager, during examination, deposed that Bank authority did not verify the signature of accused available on the cheque and the cheque was returned to the drawer as the same "had been stopped by the accused for the reason of its misplacement" had failed to produce on record the deposit slip of the cheque---Memo of the cheque in question did not disclose that the cheque had been dishonored due to having insufficient funds rather it revealed that the cheque was returned to the drawer due to stopping of the payment by the accused---Mere issuance of cheque and its having been dishonored, being actus reus, would not be able to attract the provision of S.489-F, P.P.C., simply for want of presence of element of dishonesty in the matter---No independent witness to the transaction had been examined---No documentary evidence had been produced either to prove the sale and delivery of sugar---No quantity of sugar was disclosed either in the FIR or in the evidence by the appellant or his witnesses---Prior to registration of FIR by the appellant, the accused had already filed suit for settlement of accounts and perpetual injunction against the appellant, which was pending adjudication before the Court of Civil Judge---Accused, in the said suit, had stated that though there had been business relations in between him and the appellant but nothing was outstanding against him---Evidence of the prosecution witnesses was not confidence inspiring and could not be made basis of conviction to the accused---Acquittal once granted could not be recalled merely on the possibility of a contra view---Unless, impugned view was found on fringes of impossibility, resulting into miscarriage of justice, freedom could not be recalled---Appeal…
🔒
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