RAJA SHAKEEL AHMAD, J. Through the instant writ petition under Article 86(2) of the Gilgit-Baltistan Order, 2018 petitioner seeks cancellation of order dated 29/09/2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge Gilgit in Criminal Revision No. 06/2023 and impugned orders/judgment dated 24/06/2023 and 16/07/2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Gilgit in Cr. Misc. Nos.
55/2023 and 72/2022 respectively.
2. Brief fact of the case stated in the instant writ petition is that the petitioner is resident of Kotha Pir Kot Haripur and running a business of bargaining of vehicles as registered Car showroom namely Usman Motors Dealer. The petitioner made a deal between one Amjad Ali and Ummar Shehzad whereas Ummar Shehzad purchased the impugned vehicle Suzuki vide registration No. APL-2020, bearing Engine No. 361524, Chassis No. 466173 from Amjad Ali through petitioner in consideration amount of rupees Rs. 13,40,000/ - (Thirteen Lac Forty Thousand Rupees). Thereafter, on 26-08-2021 the petitioner make another deal between the ummar Shehzad and Akmal Khan and the Akmal Khan has purchased the impugned vehicle from Ummar Shehzad through petitioner in consideration amount of rupees Rs. 13.50.000/-whereas the Akmal Khan paid Rs. 3,50,000/ while rest of amount Rs 10,00,000/ - (Ten Lac) rupees is payable. The said Akmal Khan has also purchased other vehicles including the vehicle in question in the payment of the said vehicles. The petitioner tried to contact him in various occasions whereas the said Akmal Khan denied to pay the remaining amount. Therefore, feeling aggrieved the petitioner lodged FIR No. 206/2022 at Police Station Sarie Saleh District Haripur KPK against the said Akmal Khan who have been murdered later on. After the murder of the above named deceased, the petitioner tried upon detection the impugned vehicle wherein it came to the knowledge of petitioner that the vehicle is in possession of respondent No. 01 on the fake, false and self made agreement dated 15/ 09/2021. The respondent No. 02 has taken the above mentioned impugned vehicle/Suzuki in his custody from the present respondent No. 01 under section 550, Cr.P.C against which the present respondent No. 01/petitioner in Cr. Misc, No.72/ 2022, filed an application under section 523, Cr.P.C for grant of Superdari of impugned said which has been accepted/allowed by this Hon'ble Court vide impugned order dated 16/ 07/ 2022. The petitioner filed a Criminal Revision Petition No. 22/2022 before the learned Sessions Judge Gilgit which was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge Gilgit vide impugned order dated 20/10/2022. Feeling aggrieved the petitioner filed a Writ Petition No. 286/2023 before the Hon'ble Chief Court which was dismissed but the petitioner once again knocked the doors of the learned Judicial Magistrate Gilgit through Cr. Misc. No. 55/2023 to set aside/recall the impugned order dated 16/07/2022 of the learned Judicial Magistrate Gilgit with seeking further direction to the respondent. No. 02/ SHO Jutial to impound the vehicle in question which is required in FIR No. 206/2022 PS Siraye Saleh District Haripur KPK whereas the learned Judicial Magistrate Gilgit has dismissed the Cr Misc. No.55/2023 vide impugned order dated 206-2023. Feeling aggrieved the petitioner filed Criminal Revision Petition No. 06/2023 before the learned Sessions court Gilgit which learned Judge Gilgit vide impugned order/judgment dated 29/09/2023 dismissed the same. He filed another writ petition in connection of another vehicle involved in the above mentioned FIR No. 206/2022 titled "Jangwaiz Khan v. Tashjeen Haider etc" before this Hon'ble Court which was allowed by this Hon'ble Court with the direction to the SHO Jutial to impound the said vehicle as case property in the said FIR registered at PS Siraye Saleh District Haripur by adopting the legal way.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is resident of Kotha Pir Kot Haripur and is associated with the business/bargaining of vehicles as registered Car showroom namely Usman Motors Dealer with all original documents, keys and smart card while the respondent No. 01 is resident of Sakwar Tehsil and District Gilgit, the petitioner made a deal with Amjad Ali and Ummar Shehzad whereas Ummar Shehzad purchased the impugned vehicle/Suzuki Registration No. AM 2020, bearing Engine No. 361524, Chassis No. 466173 from Amjad Ali through petitioner in consideration amount of Rs. 13,40,000/ (Thirteen Lac Forty Thousand Rupees). Thereafter, 26/08/2021 the petitioner make another deal between the Ummar Shehzad and Akmal Khan and the Akmal Khan has purchased the impugned vehicle from Ummar Shehzad through petitioner in consideration amount of its.13,50,000/- whereas the Akmal Khan paid Rs. 3,50,000/ only while rest of amount Rs. 10,00,000/ - (Ten Lac) rupees is payable. He submits that the said Akmal Khan has also purchased other vehicles including the vehicle in question in the payment of the said vehicles and the petitioner tried to contact him in various occasions whereas the said Akmal Khan denied, to pay the rest of amount to the petitioner, therefore, feeling aggrieved the petitioner lodged FIR No, 206/2022 at Police Station Sarai Saleh District Haripur KPK against the said Akmal Khan who have been murdered later on. He further submits that the petitioner tried his best to discover the vehicle and during the process it came hi his knowledge that the impugned vehicle in is in possession of respondent No. 01 on the fake, false and self-made agreement dated 15/09/2021. The leaned counsel further submitted that that the respondent No. 02 has taken the above mentioned impugned vehicle/Suzuki in his custody from the present respondent No. 01 under section 550, Cr.P.C against which the present respondent No. 01/petitioner in Cr. Misc. No.72/2022, filed an application under section 523, Cr.P.C for grant of Superdari of impugned vehicle which has been accepted/allowed by this Court vide order dated 16/07/2022 without applying judicious mind by violation the golden principal of Audi Alterm Partum as such impugned order of this Court is stark violation of golden principle of Audi Alterm Palterm and flagrant violation of fundamental rights of the petitioner. He further argued that the vehicle in question is required for investigation of above mentioned FIR, therefore, the petitioner filed a Criminal Revision Petition No. 22/2022 before the learned Sessions Judge Gilgit which was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge Gilgit vide impugned order dated 20/10/2022 in hurry and hasty manner and .maintained the impugned order. He submits that petitioner filed a Writ Petition No. 286/2023 before the Hon'ble Chief Court GB wherein the another bench of Chief Court has disposed the same vide judgment/order dated 31/05/2023 with the direction to the petitioner to approach the relevant/competent forum, therefore, the petitioner once again knocked the doors of the learned Judicial Magistrate Gilgit through Cr. Misc. No. 55/2023 to set aside/recall the impugned order dated 16/07/2022 of the learned Judicial Magistrate Gilgit with seeking further direction to the respondent No. 02/SHO Jutial to impound the vehicle in question which is required in FIR No. 206/2022 PS Sarai Saleh District Haripur KPK whereas the learned Judicial Magistrate Gilgit without applying his judicious mind, has dismissed the Cr Misc. No. 55/2023 vide impugned order dated 206-2023. He argued that the concern police i.e., Haripur police approached the respondent No. 02 and proforma respondent No. 03 to impound the vehicle in question and handover the same to the Haripur police which is required in FIR No. 206/2022 whereby the respondent No. 02/SHO Jutial flatly refused to extend their favor in this regard on the basis of above mentioned impugned orders; therefore, the said impugned orders are liable to be recalled with the direction to the respondent No. 02 to impound the vehicle in question. He also argued that the impugned judgments/orders of both the learned lower Courts are based on misconception of law and mis-appreciation of evidence on record, hence not maintainable and liable to be set aside. The impugned judgments/orders passed by the learned lower Courts are beyond the jurisdiction, the learned lower Courts have failed to exercise the jurisdiction so vested and exercised a jurisdiction not so vested to it by committing material irregularities and illegalities while passing the impugned orders/judgments. The learned counsel contended that if this Hon'ble Court has set aside the impugned judgments/orders of the learned lower Courts, the petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss which cannot be cured by any other means.
Lastly he prayed for acceptance of the instant petition by setting aside the impugned order/judgment dated 29/09/2023 and 20/04/2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge Gilgit in Cr. Revision No.06/2023 and Cr. Revision No.22/2022 as well as impugned order/judgment dated 24/06/2023 and 16/07/2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrates Gilgit in Cr. Misc Nos.
55/2023 and 72/2022.
4. On the other hand learned counsel for the contesting respondent No. 01 vehemently opposed the petition as well as arguments raised by the counsel for the petitioner and submits that respondent No. 01 have purchased the impugned vehicle from one Akmal Khan who purchased from original Gul Khan son of Sajid Khan r/o Haripur. He argued that the petitioner was owner of vehicle but he sold and transferred to the name of Gul Khan and now petitioner is not owner of the impugned vehicle. He further argued that the certificate issued by Pak Suzuki Motors Company shows that impugned vehicle was sold to Amjad Ali and both the documents i.e. letter paid of Usman Motors and sale certificate of Pak Suzuki Motors clearly shows that the petitioner is not owner of impugned vehicle as such has no locus standi to file instant petition. Lastly he prayed for dismissal of the instant petition throughout.
5. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties pro and contra at length and perused the record of the case with able assistance of the learned counsel for the parties.
6. Admittedly respondent No. 01 has purchased the impugned vehicle from one Akmal Khan who purchased from one Gul Khan son of Sajid Khan resident of Haripur. At present the petitioner is not the owner of the impugned vehicle. The certificate issued by Pak Suzuki Motors Company shows that impugned vehicle was sold to Amjad Ali and both the documents i.e. letter pad of Usman Motors and sale certificate of Pak Suzuki Motors clearly shows that neither the petitioner is owner of impugned vehicle nor he was last possessor of vehicle in question. It is also available on record that during the first round of litigation the claim of the petitioner up to the Chief Court is not accepted and the Superdari of alleged vehicle was granted to the respondent No. 1 being last possessor, which he purchased form on Akram Khan, as such at present the petitioner has no locus standi to again claim the Superdari of vehicle in question.
7. For what has been discussed above I find no ground to interfere into the judgment Order dated 24/ 06/2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge Gilgit hence maintained. The instant writ petition is dismissed being devoid of 'any merit. File.