| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1981 SLG 3157 = 1981 SLD 3157 = 1981 SCMR 44 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 16-P of 1973, decided on 15th December 1980. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the Peshawar High Court, dated 16-2-1971 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 37 of 1969).
Presented By: Dorab Patel, Nasim Hasan Shah and Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim, JJ
M. Bilal, Advocate and F. Safdar Hussain, Advocate-on-Record for Appel lant. Nemo for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 5 S. Ibne Ali, Additional Advocate-General (N: -W. F. P.) for the State. Samiullah Jan, Advocate and M. Qasim Imam, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents. No. 6.
Criminal Appeal No. 16-P of 1973, decided on 15th December 1980. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the Peshawar High Court, dated 16-2-1971 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 37 of 1969).
Presented By: Dorab Patel, Nasim Hasan Shah and Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim, JJ
M. Bilal, Advocate and F. Safdar Hussain, Advocate-on-Record for Appel lant. Nemo for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 5 S. Ibne Ali, Additional Advocate-General (N: -W. F. P.) for the State. Samiullah Jan, Advocate and M. Qasim Imam, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents. No. 6.
PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES CORPORATION- of Appellant
VERSUS
KHALID WAHEED AND OTHERS-Respondents
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 409, 420, 109
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) Ss. 409, 420 & 109-Criminal breach of trust-Cheating-Company, criminal liability of-Dishonour of cheques-Company (first, six respondents being its directors) obtaining appellant's (Pakistan International Airlines Corporation's) agency binding itself to hand over to appellants amounts collected by it for freight and sale of appellant's tickets after deducting its commission but after some time issuing cheques aggregating near about four lacs of rupees to appellant, such cheques dishonoured by Bank, and appellants after being, put off for some time: filing criminal` complaint-Contention that mere fact of cheques being dishonoured twice by Bank not by itself sufficient to make out ingre dients of offence-Held, company not alleged to have been doing any business other than that of running appellant's agency, all money received by it from customers, subject to commission earned by it held on trust for payment to appellant and cheques being for very large amounts, dishonour of cheques itself made out ingredients of Ss, 409 & 420, Penal Code, 1860, as argued with reference to 1972 P Cr. L J 1182. Ghulam Muhammad v. Muzammal Khan P L D 1967 S C 317 and Abdul Karim Butt v. Abdul Qavyum and another 1972 P Cr. L J 1182 ref: (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) Ss. 409, 420 & 109-Criminal breach of trust-Cheating --Company, criminal liability of-Company although distinct legal entity and quite, different from its members, including directors, yet com pany could act only through its directors and officers--Allegation of criminal offence against company-Can only mean alleged offence having been committed by its detectors or officers-Court in order to decide as to who committed such offence always required to pierce veil of incorporation-Commission of a criminal offence by a company, held, not inconsistent with mens rea on part of its directors. Saloman v. Saloman 1897 A C 22 and President v. Shaukat Ali P L D 1971 SC585ref.) (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) Ss. 409, 420 & 109-Criminal breach of trust-Cheating-Company, criminal liability of company…