' The present petition contends for quashment of the case The State v. Shakila Bano under section 420/468/471, P.P.C. Now consigned to record by Muhammad Salah-ud-Din, Magistrate 1st Class, Lahore, the learned trial Court.
2. The brief facts leading to the present petition are that a case was registered against the petitioner on the complaint of one Muhammad Aslam, alleging that the petitioner had forged a power of attorney on behalf of her husband, Abdul Hameed, which was pending in the Court of the above-named Magistrate, and as the prosecution had failed to produce its evidence despite 82 opportunities provided by way of adjournments, the petitioner had submitted an application under section 249-A, P.P.C. For dismissal of the case in question.
3. However, the learned trial Court had directed the case to be consigned to the record while observing that the prosecution had been provided 82 adjournments for producing its remaining evidence as only two witnesses had appeared on its behalf, and further observing that in spite of warrants of arrest the P.Ws. Had not put in appearance and as such no case is made out against the accused/petitioner and further proceedings will be sheer waste of time.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, contended for the quashment of the case in question against the petitioner and submitted that as is clear from the order of the learned trial Court, no case is made out against the petitioner on the basis of evidence on the record, and as in spite of 82 adjournments etc. The prosecution has failed to produce its evidence, therefore, in fact, the petitioner's application under the provisions of section 249-A, Cr.P.C. Should have been allowed and the case dismissed but the learned trial Court failed to pass an order to that effect and in fact consigned the case to record. Further submitted that, therefore, this case can be revived at any stage, which could not only create hardship for the petitioner but shall tantamount to abuse of the process of Court, as the learned trial Court had come to a definite conclusion that no case is made out against the petitioner and that further proceedings shall be sheer waste of time, as stated in the impugned order, dated 25-8-1990.
5. The contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner have a lot of force. The bare reading of the impugned order, dated 25-8-1990 of the learned trial Court clearly establishes that it had come to a definite conclusion that no case was made out against the present petitioner and that the failure of the prosecution to produce all its evidence in spite of 82 adjournments allowed for the said purpose, and despite warrants of arrest having been issued against the P.Ws. In vain renders the further proceedings of the case to be an exercise in futility and sheer waste of time. Therefore, it is pertinent to infer that such a definitive conclusion of the case, as determined by the learned trial Court, should have 'resulted in the application of the petitioner under section 249-A, Cr.P.C. To be accepted and the case in question dismissed. But for the reasons ' best known to the trial Court, instead it ordered the case to be consigned to the record, which is totally untenable. The learned 'counsel for the State while conceding the same had contended for the case to be remanded to the trial Court. However, the Court is of the view that the remand shall only result in further waste of time and hardship to the petitioner, without there being reasonable probability of her conviction under the facts and circumstances detailed above and, furthermore, as it is a well-settled principle of law that no one should suffer because of an act of the Court.
6. Therefore, in pursuance to the above discussion, the present petition is hereby allowed and the case The State v. Shakila Bano consigned to the record by Muhammad Salah-ud-Din, Magistrate 1st Class, Lahore is hereby quashed.