Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
1981 SCMR 1095

ABDUL KARIM vs THE STATE AND ANOTHUR

Citation1981 SCMR 1095
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 297 of 1979 Cr. Misc. No.
Date1981-12-19
Judge(s)Maulvi Mushtaq Hussain, Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Aslam Riaz Hussain
ResultPetition dismissed

ORDER

Therespondent NoNo. 2, with the Agricultural arrangement arrived Bank of Pakistan a sum of Rs. 3, lacs was paid to Abdul Karim petitioner through the said Bank. In pursuance of order No 944 dated 1-3-72 placed upon him fore cotton Ginning and Bailing Press. Abdul Karim, the supplier, was the proprietor Messrs Fahim Engineering Company Ltd. l Multan. The Bailing Press was to be supplied within three months. A pare of the machinery was supplied anal the other part was sold byUmar Hayat to some body else at a higher price. A case under section 406420, P. P. C. Was registered against Abdul Karim petitioner on 29-1-1973. The parts complained of were under orders of the Courts delivered on supardari to Umar Hayat. Karim filed a petition for quashment of tae challan which was put in Court by the P. D. S. P. On 2;4-11-7a. By its order dated 22-4-79 a learned Judge of the High Court accepted the petition and quashed. The criminal proceedings pending against Karim.

2. The petitioner has left aggrieved by the observations made in the judgment by the learned Judge of the High Court to the effect that the Agreements dated 18-:-73 (Annexure C) and 15-1-79 (Annexure 'E') had been fabricated by the petitioner and that the machinery which was taken on supardari by Umar Hayat was the balance of the contracted machinery and that respondent No. 2 was not liable to pay is 1,40,000, to him.

3. Leave to appeal is refused on the short ground that the aforemen--tioned observations made by the learned, judge were not necessary for the quashment of the case against Abdul Karim and have no binding effect upon the petitioner. Any civil proceedings which if instituted will be disposed of on their own merits on the basis of the evidence that may be led in such a case.

4. The petitioner asked for quashment which be got from the Court. This petition has no merits and is dismissed limine.

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch