1. This is an application for quashment of proceedings pending befog the Court of A. C. M. Civil Lines, Karachi under section 466/467, P. P. C. On 3rd March, 1976, the complainant Ghulam Mustafa had filed complaint under sections 467 and 468, P. P. C. Read with section 465 of Pakistan Penal Code stating that he was un-disputed owner of particular property in respect of which proceedings were pending before the Civil Court, and that the accused is in unauthorized possession of 2 rooms of the portion of that same building and she made an application with an affidavit to Excise and Taxation Officers of mutation of her name in respect of the said 2 rooms which was in fact owned by the complainant and thus the averments made by Mst. Aisha Bai, the accused in that complaint, that she is the owner of 2 rooms and had possession thereof, was false, bogus, forged and malicious and acting on that application the Excise and Taxation Authority effected the mutation in her favour, and therefore, the accused has committed offence under the Pakistan Penal Code. The Assistant Commissioner and S. D. M. Recorded the statement of complainant under section 200, Cr. P. C. And then forwarded the same to S. H. O. Baghdadi to himself enquire this matter and submit his report under section 200, Cr. P. C. Consequently, on 18th March, 1976 the learned S. D. M. City ordered as under:-- "Perused the complaint, and also the police report. A prima facie case is made out against the accused under section 467/468, P. P. C. Register and issue summon to accused. Put of to 22nd March, 1976."
2. Thereafter, the applicant was served and charge under section 466/467 P. P. C. Was framed on 10th July, 1976 and thereafter, the Complainant was examined. The charge reads as under:- "That you from 7th March, 1972 to 14th December, 1974 for the offences of giving false application supported with an affidavit to the Excise and Taxation Department for mutation of your name as owner of 2 rooms in Property No. LY-8/128 situate) at Haji Muhammad Yousuf Road Nawabad, Karachi and then obtained lease of the same property fraudulently from K. M. C. And thus committed forgery of record by making false statements and thus made forgery and valuable security and have also committed forgery for the purpose of cheating and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 466/457 of Pakistan Penal Code, and then my cognizance."
3. Mr. B. M. Bangash submitted that the S. D. M. Has no jurisdiction to try the case under sections 466 and 467, -P. P. C. Which are offences in respect of forgery.
4. Mr. Nooruddin Sarki has conceded that this is the correct legal position but he stated that in such case the offence would be triable by the Sessions Court but the proceedings could not be quashed in toto. This is a correct submission to make provided and offences made out under those sections.
5. Mr. B. M. Bangash further submitted that from the complaint as well as the charge it is apparent that the only offence alleged against the applicant is of making a false statement in her application before the Taxation Authority and not of forging any documents and thus the offences could be only under section 182, P. P. C. But an offence under section 182, P. P. C. Could be tried only if there was a. Complaint in writing from the public servant concerned before the false information was laid by Mst. Aisha Bai and admittedly there is no complaint so far by the Taxation Authority.
6. Mr. Nooruddin Sarki states that ingredients of section 463, Cr. P. C. Define forgero and these provisions are attracted to this one clearly and that case is made out in as much as the filing of a false application which contained false information and tiling of a false affidavit is covered by the expression of false documents and intention of filing of those documents was to get the property mutated in her favour.
7. I do, not agree with these submissions as the making of a false documents is clearly explained in section 464 of P. P. C. And the first, second and third provisions of this section clearly show that the making of an application by a person with false averments is not covered by the expression of making a false documents. There is no allegation making any false document against her: In these circumstances, merely making an application by Mst. Aisha Bai with a false assertion cannot be covered by the provision of section 466/467, P. P. C. Such false application can be covered only by the provision of section 182, P. P. C. And since section 195, Cr. P. C. Requires a complaint under section 182, P. P. P. By the person before whom the false information is laid and since the present complaint is only by Ghulam Mustafa Memon and not by the officers of Excise and Taxation Authority, therefore, it cannot be treated as a complaint under section 182, P. P. C. From the documents filed by the complainant alongwith his complaint, I find an order made by the Secretary Excise and Taxation Department on 24th August, 1978 directing that K. M. C. Should initiate action against Mst. Aisha Bai under law for committing unlawful act in obtaining lease of the said property by fraud therefore, K. M. C. Could probably file a complaint against Mst. Aisha Bia for the alleged fraud committed by her, or the Excise and Taxation Officers before whom Mst. Aisha Bai had moved an application for transfer, of the disputed property on 10th March, 1973 could lodge a complaint against her under section 182, P. P. C. For making a mis-statement in her application.
8. But continuing the proceedings under section 465/467, P. C. P. Are not warranted in law as Mst.
9. Aisha Bai did not make or forge any false documents and charge under section 466/467 is completely uncalled for.
10. The proceedings under section 466/467, P. P. C. Pending before A. C. M. Civil Lines against Mst. Aisha Bai on the private compliant of Ghulam Mustafa Memon are hereby quashed.