SHOUKAT ALI vs MUHAMMAD ISMAIL Ss — 2022 PCrLJN 60 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

SHOUKAT ALI VS MUHAMMAD ISMAIL Ss. 406, 420, 468, 471 & 506---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 417 & 249-A---Criminal breach of trust, cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property, forgery, using as genuine a forged document and criminal intimidation---Appreciation of evidence---Appeal against acquittal---Complainant lodged FIR against the accused by stating that the complainant loaded the vehicle of the accused with fifty thousand liter furnace oil amounting to Rs. 37,94,931/- and the same was sent for other city through driver and cleaner and also had given amount of Rs. 1,40,300/- as travel expenses to the son of the accused---Driver with the connivance of his employer prepared forged invoices and committed criminal breach of trust---Trial Court while exercising the power under S. 249-A, Cr.P.C., acquitted the accused by holding that the prosecution had no material to connect the accused persons for the charge---Validity---Record showed that alleged incident was taken place on 6.9.2014 whereas FIR of the incident was lodged by complainant on 24.6.2017, after the delay of about two and half years for which no satisfactory explanation had been furnished---First Information Report had been lodged by the complainant with due deliberation and consultation---Record transpired that complainant entrusted his property, if any, to driver and cleaner, therefore, necessary ingredients of S. 406, P.P.C., which provide that the property which was misappropriated must be entrusted to the alleged person or same must be in his dominancy, which were missing in the case as neither vehicle nor furnace oil was entrusted to the respondents---Ingredients of S. 420, P.P.C. were cheating, inducing dishonestly deception by delivering the property---No ingredients of S. 420, P.P.C. were noticed in facts and circumstances of the present case---Accused had also lodged FIR against present complainant under S. 332, P.P.C., much prior to present FIR, taking said aspect of the case into consideration, it appeared that the present FIR was a counter-blast of the FIR of accused---Civil litigation was also going on in between the parties---Section 249-A, Cr.P.C. was an enabling provision giving power to the Magistrate of criminal jurisdiction after hearing the prosecution and accused to give finding that charge was groundless or that no probability of the accused being convicted of any offence existed---If the court was reasonably convinced that a criminal charge could not sustain, going on trial was not necessary, said powers could be exercised even before framing of charge---Trial Court had elaborately discussed all the points involved in the case, therefore, the same need not to be interfered---Appeal was dismissed having no merit.

SHOUKAT ALI vs MUHAMMAD ISMAIL Ss — 2022 PCrLJN 60 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported