Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
2000 MLD 1008

MUHAMMAD ANWAR and another vs THE STATE

Citation2000 MLD 1008
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Writ Petition No,1411 of 2000
Date2000-03-08
Judge(s)Khawaja Muhammad Sharif
ResultPetition accepted

' This judgment will dispose of Writ Petition No,1411 of 2000 filed by Muhamad Anwar and Muhammad Ashraf, petitioners, seeking quashing of F.I.R. No,401 registered with Police Station Dijkot, district Faisalabad on 21-12-1999 under sections 420/468/472 and 406, P.P.C. About an occurrence which took place on 5-7-1997.

2. Brief facts of the case are that Maqbool Ahmed purchased a car bearing registration No,LOJ/6380 chassis No,7242073, engine No,0547738 for a consideration of Rs,2,50,000 on 5-7-1997 and got registered the same in his name on 19-9-1997. The vehicle was purchased from Muhammad ' Anwar and Muhammad Ashraf, car dealers. Complainant further stated in the F.I.R.

That in the month of March, 1998, the said car was taken into possession by CIA on the suspicion that it was a stolen car. Upon this, it came to the knowledge of the complainant that Muhammad Anwar and Muhammad Ashraf have not only prepared the forged documents but had also tampered with chassis number of the vehicle. The car was taken into possession by Police of district Sheikhupura. It was further stated in the F.I.R. That a case under section 379/411, P.P.C. Also stands registered vide F.I.R. No,237, dated 6-10-1991 with Police Station Margala, Islamabad.

Complainant allegedly asked both the present petitioners, namely, Anwar and Ashraf to return back his money as they had committed a fraud with him upon which both the above named persons alongwith two unknown threatened the complainant to put him to death if he again asked for the return of the money.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in fact Maqbool Ahmad, complainant, respondent No,3 in fast friend of S.S.P., Faisalabad and under his instructions, the present case has been registered; both the petitioners had purchased the car in question from one Muzaffar Khan while Muzaffar Khan son of Aiaab Khan had purchased the car from Aljadoon Motors, Lahore; Mir Baz had filed Criminal Miscellaneous No,1781-H of 1999 which came up for hearing before this Court on 30-10-1999, a bailiff was deputed and on recovery of Muzaffar Khan, his statement was recorded on 1-11-1999. He was also got medically examined and thereafter, a case vide F.I.R. No,697 was registered with Police Station Peoples Colony, Faisalabad under section 365/337-F(ii)/337- L(ii)/379/342/161, P.P.C. Read with section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, and that the Police being revengeful in connivance with the complainant got this case registered against the petitioners. Further, submits that there is delay of more than 2 years without any explanation and that the present F.I.R. Is a counter-blast to the F.I.R. Got registered on the statement of Muzaffar Khan from whom the present petitioners had purchased the car. Learned counsel lastly submits that no offence whatsoever has been committed by the petitioners.

4. Learned counsel for the complainant who had appeared in this writ petition at his own without any notice to the complainant contends that the petitioners had played fraud upon the complainant; the car sold to the complainant was stolen one and that its chasis number was tampered with by the petitioners.

5. Learned Additional Advocate-General submits that stand of Muzzaffar Khan-during the course of investigation before the Police was that he had purchased the disputed car from Aljadoon Motors, Lahore. He, however, candidly concedes that already a case for theft of the vehicle in question stands registered with Police Station Margala, Islamabad vide, F.I.R. No,237, dated 6-10-1991 and during the course of investigation of that case it will be determined as to who are the accused for having stolen the car. Malik Abbas, S.-I. From Police Station Dijkot present in Court submits that he has tried to contact the owners of Aljadoon Motors but they are not available till today. He further concedes that till today, there is no evidence on record to show that the petitioners had tampered with the chasis number and that Aljadoon Motors had purchased the said car from one Izat Shah who is also not available.

6. I have heard learned counsel for parties and have gone through the record. It may be noted here that in the habeas petition (Criminal Miscellaneous No,1781/H of 1999) filed by Mir Baz real brother of Muzaffar Khan, Muzaffar Khan was recovered by the bailiff of this Court; he was got medically examined and his statement was also recorded by this Court. In his statement, he stated that he had purchased the said car from Aljadoon Motors and even after registration of the criminal case, his stand before the Police was that he is a bona fide purchaser having purchased the car from Aljadoon Motors. Even otherwise, there is delay of 2 years and 5 months as the occurrence took place on 5-7-1997 while the F.I.R. Was got registered on 21-12-1999. There is no explanation for this delay. It seems that the present case has been lodged with mala fide intention in order to pressures Muzaffar Khan and the present petitioners from whom the complainant had purchased the car. In my view, Maqbool was made a complainant of the case by the Police in order to take revenge from Muzaffar Khan.

' Keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the statement made by the learned Additional Advocate-General that as to who are the actual accused will be determined in the case F.I.R. No,237, dated 6-10-1991 registered with Police Station Margala, district Islamabad, this petition is accepted with the result that proceedings arising out of F.I.R. No,401, dated 21-12-1999 registered with Police Station Dijkot, District Faisalabad under sections 420/468/471 and 406, P.P.C.

Are hereby quashed leaving the parties to bear their own costs. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch