' M. BILAL KHAN, J.---By filing this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Rellan Nasir son of Muhammad Naseer, petitioner, seeks quashing of F.I.R. No, 242 of 2008 dated 17-5-2008; registered with police station Rail Bazar, District Faisalabad, for an offence under section 489-F, P.P.C.
2. In support of this petition for quashing the F.I.R., it has been argued that the allegation in the F.I.R.
Is false, baseless and malicious; that the F.I.R. Has been got recorded by the complainant with the active connivance of S.H.O. Concerned; that the cheques could not have been presented for encashment in the presence of injunctive order issued by a civil Court that F.I.R. Had been lodged one year seven months and ten days after the cheques had been dishonoured; that the F.I.R. Is a counterblast to a civil suit filed by the petitioner against the complainant for rendition of accounts; that criminal proceedings. Have to be stayed while a civil suit is pending; that civil dispute is being transformed into a criminal liability.
' I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have also perused the available record.
4. In order to appreciate the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner a factual inquiry needs to be undertaken which cannot be resorted to A while this Court is seized of a constitutional petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. There is no substance in the argument of the learned counsel that criminal proceedings have to be held in B abeyance in all circumstances during pendency of a civil suit, reliance can profitably be made to Haji Sardar Khalid Saleem v. Muhammad Ashraf and others (2006 SCM R 1192) wherein the honourable apex Court has held that criminal proceedings were not barred in presence o C civil proceedings and that civil and criminal proceedings could be carried out simultaneously. Likewise no civil Court has got the jurisdiction to prevent presentation of a cheque for encashment, which is a negotiable instrument. Even the injunctive order dated 18-4-2008 granted by the learned Civil Judge had only directed the D defendant not to receive money through illegal means and force.
Presenting a valid cheque for encashment by no stretch of the argument could be termed as an attempt to receive money by illegal means or by force.
' There is no merit in this petition which is accordingly dismissed in limine.