IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, J.---The petitioner claims that his car bearing Registration No.RNE/3600 has been taken into possession by the police without any justification. According to the petitioner earlier F.I.R. No.240 of 2003 was got lodged against him by Akbar Abbas, respondent No.4 regarding the same car and the same having been found false, the petitioner was acquitted of the charge, which order has attained the finality, but in spite of that the S.H.O./respondent No.3 in connivance with respondent No.4 has illegally taken into possession the said car from the petitioner and detained at the police station.
2. The S.H.O. States that an information was received on telephone No.15 about the theft of the car and same was taken into possession as respondent No.4 claimed to be its owner and the matter has been referred to the learned Ilaqa Magistrate.
3. Admittedly the petitioner has been acquitted of the case earlier got lodged by respondent No.4 and the car in question was in possession of the petitioner. The police cannot decide about the fate of the car or possession of the car under any provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code when a Court of competent jurisdiction has already acquitted the petitioner and no appeal has been filed against the said order, which has attained the finality. The S.H.O./respondent No.3 had no authority to intercept the car in question after the acquittal of the petitioner from the case without any orders by the Court of competent jurisdiction, which action is declared to be illegal and without any lawful authority. Consequently, this writ petition is accepted and the S.H.O./respondent No.3 is directed to hand over the vehicle in question to the petitioner immediately. However, Akbar Abbas, respondent No.4 can seek alternate remedy provided under the law.