[15-12-2000]. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the contents of the F.I.R. Themselves indicate that the dispute between the complainant of the said F.I.R., namely, Syed Ijaz Hussain respondent No,4, on the one hand, and the accused therein, namely, Raza Mehdi and Jafar Mehdi petitioners, is one of a civil nature. He further contends that even the said matter relates to some transaction between the above-named parties which took place in March, 1997. An F.I.R. No, 365 of 2000, on the basis of such an occurrence, has now been registered against the two petitioners on 29-11-2000. In these circumstances, learned counsel contends that the said F.I.R. Is liable to be quashed.
2. Notice. The respondent No,4 shall also be served through the S.H.O. Respondent No,3. Relist on 23- 1-2001.
[15-2-2001]. I have heard learned counsel for both sides. The contentions of learned counsel for the petitioners in support of the quashment petition, have already been set out in the first order passed in this case, dated 15-12-2000.
2. I have gone through the contents of the F.I.R., with the assistance of both learned counsel. What is apparent there from is that on 17-3-1997 some material was provided to the petitioners for the purpose of printing. The F.I.R., itself asserts that the petitioners had informed the complainant that the aforesaid material, which, admittedly, was not fit for the purpose for which it was meant, had been sold. The complainant has asserted that thereafter the petitioner stated that they would pay the sale proceeds of such sale to the complainant. It is implicit in the above assertion itself that the complainant cannot assert a breach of trust because he himself had information that the material had been sold and evidently acquiesced in such action. The matter was then reported to the police, according to learned counsel for the complainant, on 15-10-1998. No F.I.R., was registered at that time. The F.I.R. In question bearing No,365 of 2000 was then registered on 29-11-2000. The contents thereof, as noted, do not make out a case of breach of trust. On the other hand, it is apparent that there is a dispute of a civil nature between the petitioners and the complainant relating to money. Learned counsel for the petitioners points out that on account of certain work done by the petitioners, the petitioners are entitled to recover an amount of money from the complainant rather than being liable for any payment to the complainant.
4. The dispute between the parties can only be adjudicated upon as a civil matter by the competent Civil Court. The circumstances narrated above justify the conclusion that the above referred, F.I:R., constitutes abuse of legal process. In the circumstances, the present petition is allowed and F.I.R. No,365 of 2000, dated 29-11-2000 registered under sections 420/406, P.P.C., at Police Station Ichhra, Lahore, is quashed.
5. This order, however, shall not prevent either party from asserting its claim against the other subject to law. Disposed of.
F.I.R. Quashed.