Law:

Section:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----S. 550--Possession of vehicle--Superdari of vehicle in-question was still pending adjudication before the Court--Determination--Final order could be brought under challenge in the Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court--Controversy essentially pertained to disputed questions of fact which could not be resolved in Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court--Appeal dismissed. [P. 1099] A & B Judgment Through this petition, the petitioner has challenged the orders dated 26.07.2006 and 28.07.2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sargodha, on the ground that the same are arbitrary, fanciful and passed on extraneous consideration, hence liable to be set side. 2. The facts of the case are that Respondent No. 3 lodged F.I.R. No 7 on 9.01.2006 at Police Station Factory Area, Sargodha, regarding theft of Vehicle No. MNQ-437. The police pursuant to the F.I.R. took the said vehicle in possession under Section 550 Cr.P.C. The petitioner as well as one Malik Akbar Hayat filed applications for obtaining the said vehicle on Superdari with the learned Magistrate 1st Class, Sargodha, who accepted the application of the petitioner on the premise that the petitioner was in possession of the original Registration Book. Respondent No. 3 who claims to have purchased the vehicle in question from Malik Akbar Hayat assailed the orders of the learned Magistrate before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sargodha. On 22.7.2006, the learned Judge admitted the revision petition for regular hearing and vide order dated 28.7.2006 while observing that the vehicle in question was case property of case F.I.R. No. 7 of 2006 directed the police to take possession of the vehicle. The case was adjourned to 24.8.2006 which is still pending decision with the learned Additional Sessions Judge. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the aforesaid orders of the learned Revisional Court inter alia on the grounds that the petitioner was bona fide purchaser of the vehicle in question which fact was borne out from continual possession of the petitioner and was affirmed by Respondent No. 3 in his statement before the…

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