MUHAMMAD ALAM, J.---Petitioner has questioned propriety of order dated 25-10-2016, that the learned Banking Court passed in Civil Suit No. 197/2013. For ready reference, we reproduce the impugned order hereunder:- O.S. No.22 25-10-2016 "Mr. Mola Jan Coordinator, representative of KCBL present. Judgment debtor namely Mohammad Ali brought in police custody today. Record perused. In April/May 2004, he was disbursed a loan of amounting Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees fifteen lac). When he failed to discharge his liabilities the bank filed recovery suit before Administrator Civil Judge Class I Gilgit on 23-12-2010. Later on, the suit was transferred to this court, according to the bank representative statement Rs.3925353/- (Rupees thirty nine lac twenty five thousand three hundred and fifty three) is outstanding against him.
It is worthy to note that the judgment debtor not only played foul game with bank but also tried to play the same game with the court, therefore, there is no other alternative with the court except to commit to the jail, however, the date of hearing remain same i.e. 02-11-2016." Sd/x Mehr Ijaz Ali Sial Judge Banking Court Gilgit-Baltistan Gilgit
2. Respondent (KCB) filed a suit (Civil Suit No.197/2013) for recovery of Rs.26,49,831/- along with costs, expenses and cost of funds. Petitioner contested the suit, but trial court passed a decree entailing to Execution Petition No.260/2013 of so passed decree. Petitioner filed this petition feeling aggrieved from impugned order, as the trial court passed impugned order in connection with execution proceedings in the said court.
3.The case in hand has a very astonishing and painful aspect for consideration. Petitioner sought suspension of impugned order through his application (Civil Misc. No.344/2016). On 19-12-2016, this Court dismissed the said petition. On 22-12-2016, petitioner filed ,another application (Civil Misc.
No.453/2016) seeking suspension of impugned order dated 25-10-2016 and also prayed for his release from detention. Admittedly, courts in Gilgit-Baltistan were closed for winter vacations soon- after working hours on 22-12-2016. According to the schedule, issued from the office of Registrar Chief Court Gilgit-Baltistan, Hon'ble Judge Malik Haq Nawaz assumed his charges as Vacations Judge on 23-12-2016, but on the same day, i.e., on 23-12-2016, the Hon'ble Chief Judge passed the following order on Civil Misc. No.453/2016:- "Petitioner be released forthwith subject to furnishing of personal bond of Rs.1,000,000/- (ten lac only) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction Registrar Chief Court, however, main revision petition shall be heard by Banking Court on fixed date."
4. In our opinion, the Hon'ble Chief Judge could not pass any judicial order on 23-12-2016, particularly any order conflicting orders of the DB. Order dated 23-12-2016, passed by the Hon'ble Chief Judge on Civil Misc. No.453/2016, is very conflicting with order of the DB passed on 19-12-2016 in Civil Misc. No.344/2016. We have gone through the above referred two petitions (Civil Misc.
No.344/2016 and Civil Misc. No.453/2016) which are almost similar with the similar prayer. It is very important to note that petitioner did not give any para in the petition of Civil Misc. No.453/2016 regarding filing and dismissal of the petition Civil Misc. No.344/2016. We, therefore, dismiss Civil Misc. No.453/2016 and resultantly set aside order dated 23-12-2016 of the Hon'ble Chief Judge passed in Civil Misc. No.453/2016.
5. In the above circumstances, it is evident that petitioner has played with the court, therefore, deserves to be dealt with in accordance with law. Petition in hand dismissed and impugned order upheld. Trial court, i.e., the Banking Court is free to issue non-bailable warrants for arrest and production of petitioner and pass orders of detaining the petitioner in the Civil Prison or even to pass any order in accordance with circumstances of the case. Learned trial court may issue process against sureties of the petitioner that the petitioner produced in the light of order dated 23-12-2016 of the Hon'ble Chief Judge passed in Civil Misc. No.453/2016, if the need be. Petition dismissed. This file be consigned to record.