Case Details

Citation(s)
2024 SLG 6143 2024 SLD 6143 = 2024 PCRLJ 909
Islamabad High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 172 of 2021, decided on 5th December, 2023.
Before Arbab Muhammad Tahir, J
Raja Iftikhar Ahmad for Appellant. Mudassar Hussain Malik for
Respondents. Hazrat Younas with Anwar SI for the State.

GHAZALA ALI---Appellant

VERSUS

SIKANDAR RAMZAN CHAUDHRY and 2 others---Respondents

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 420,468,471

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 249A

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------Ss. 420, 468 & 471---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 249-A--Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property, using as genuine a forged document, forgery---Accused moved an application under S. 249-A, Cr.P.C., before the Trial Court for his acquittal claiming that the charge against him was groundless and there was no probability of him being convicted of any offence---Said application was allowed---Validity---Record showed that the alleged transaction of transfer of allotment in the name of two brothers i.e. respondent No.1 and husband of respondent No.2 was made in the year 1991 while subject FIR was registered by the appellant in the year 2018 i.e. after twenty-seven years of alleged transaction and after about twenty years of the first agreement wherein she had also been a signatory---Before the registration of instant FIR, the appellant had already filed a suit on 09.01.2018 for cancellation of agreement dated 17.01.1998 with a delay of more than twenty years---As there were two reports of Handwriting Expert of even date, filed before the Trial Court along with reports under S.173, Cr.P.C, one allegedly contained fake signatures of the official concerned while the other, filed with supplementary report under S.173, Cr.P.C, testified as genuine---In order to verify the veracity of the report, on the direction of the Court, FIA filed comprehensive report on 24.10.2022---As per said report, made part of file, signatures of late husband of respondent No. 2 were similar in characteristics with his routine signatures---Thus, report negated allegation of forgery, as alleged by the appellant in her F.I.R and pressed to seek full-length inquiry on the basis of reports containing fake signatures of the official concerned, which, of course, deserved stern departmental action against the delinquent/s, after tracing them out by the FIA and the police as well---Apart from fake Handwriting Expert Report, rest of incriminating material made basis to indict the respondents for the offence alleged, comprised of documents mentioned in the recovery memo---None of those documents even remotely suggested that any fraud, as…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register