Case Details

Citation(s)
2012 SLG 847 2012 SLD 847 2012 YLR 353
Sindh High Court
Criminal Revision Application No. 51 of 2009, heard on 26-09-2011.
GULZAR AHMED, JUSTICE SALMAN HAMID, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Nadeem Ahmed Farooqui
Respondent(s) by: Shahid Ahmed Shaikh A.A.G. Muhammad Qasim, Standing Counsel for FIA.

MESSRS ALARFAN ELECTRONICS TRADING L.L.C. THROUGH AUTHORIZED PERSON

VS

THE STATE AND 7 OTHERS

Law: Offences in Respect of Banks (Special Courts) Ordinance, 1984

Section: 2(d)

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 34,109,420,468,471

Offences in Respect of Banks (Special Courts) Ordinance (IX of 1984)--- ----S.2(d)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.420, 468, 471, 34 & 109---Cheating, forgery and using as genuine a forged document---Return of interim challan---Inspector FIA after investigating the matter, submitted interim challan before the (Special Court) (Offences in respect of Banks)---Subsequently, Investigating Officer filed application for return of challan on the ground that as after completion of the investigation, no banker was found involved in commission of any offence which would fall within the ambit of the affairs of business of the bank---Said application was accepted and the Special Court returned the challan observing that prima facie the matter related to import and export and that the court did not have jurisdiction to entertain the matter as same did not fall within the stipulation of Scheduled Offences as contemplated under provisions of the Offences in Respect of Banks (Special Courts) Ordinance, 1984---Special Court, in circumstances directed the prosecution to submit challan before the court which had jurisdiction to entertain the case---Validity---Out of eight respondents only one was a Banking Company which was not a party to the proceedings---Rest of the respondents were private parties---Provisions of Offences in Respect of Banks (Special Courts) Ordinance, 1984, at best were applicable to one respondent and/or its employees and officers, if the case was brought against them for causing loss in connection with the Banking business---Allegations against the said respondent were general in nature and no specific name was available in the F.I.R. or in the challan against whom Scheduled Offence as contemplated under S.2(d) of the Ordinance could be raised---Consignment in question had been released and said respondent only had acted strictly as per the banking practice in vogue and facilitated all of them by providing its services as per laid down rules, practice and procedure---Special Court, in circumstances, had rightly returned the case papers by concluding that the offence as contained in F.I.R., was out-side the pale of S.2(d) of the Ordinance. A. Habib Ahmed…
🔒
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