Raja Saeed Akram Khan, C.J. In all the captioned appeals, by leave of the Court, common legal and factual propositions are involved, hence, the same are being decided through the proposed consolidated judgment.
2. The facts leading to filing of the titled appeals are that the vehicle of Syed Iftikhar Hussain Gillani, appellant, was seized under section 550, Cr.P.C. He filed an application before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Muzaf farabad for release of the vehicle on Superdari . The application was rejected vide order dated 23.10.2018. The revision petition filed against the said order before the Sessions Judge, Muzaf farabad (made over to the Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaf farabad) was dismissed vide order dated 31.10.2018. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant (Syed Iftikhar Hussain Gillani) filed a writ petition before the High Court claiming therein that the Police has got no authority to seize the vehicle under section 550/523, Cr.P.C. on the ground that the same is non-custom paid, hence, acts of seizure of the vehicle by the police, rejection of the application by Sub Divisional Magistrate and dismissal of the revision petition by the Additional Sessions Judge are illegal and without lawful authority . After necessary proceedings, the learned High Court dismissed the writ petition through the impugned judgment dated 27.03.2019, which has been called in question by the appellants by filing appeals No.212 and 370 of 2019. In the similar circumstances, the application filed by the appellant (Saud Iftikhar) was rejected by the Magistrate First, Class. The proceedings conducted by the Police were called in question before the High Court by filing application under section 561-A, Cr.P.C, which was dismissed through order dated 07.1 1.2019, subject-matter of appeal No.08/2020.
3. At the very outset, Kh. Muhammad Maqbool War, the learned Advocate General, stated that the matter of confiscation of non-custom paid vehicles also arose in Gilgit Baltistan and Pakistan, wherein, the policies were framed. Likewise, the Government of Azad Jammu and Kashmir is also intended to formulate a comprehensive policy in this regard.
4. On this, the learned counsel for the appellants submitted that they would be satisfied, if these appeals are disposed of with the direction to the Government to formulate a comprehensive policy regarding non-custom paid vehicles, however , the vehicles of the appellants are under confiscation since 2018 and there is an apprehension of misuse as well as deterioration of vehicles, hence, a time span be fixed in this regard.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. As the learned Advocate- General has apprised the Court that the Government is intended to formulate a comprehensive policy in this regard, thus, in the public interest, we are intended to dispose of these appeals in the light of statement of learned Advocate General and direct the Government to formulate a comprehensive policy regarding non-custom paid vehicles. We are also aware of the fact that the appellants' vehicles are under confiscation since 2018, hence, the apprehension shown by the appellants regarding misuse and deterioration of vehicles is genuine, therefore, we direct the concerned to formulate the policy preferably within a period of six months.
All the titled appeals are disposed of in the above terms. No order as to costs.