MUHAMMAD MUSAWAR ABBASI vs State S — 2023 PCrLJ 149 ISLAMABAD

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

MUHAMMAD MUSAWAR ABBASI VS State S. 406---Specific Relief act (I of 1877), S. 12---Criminal breach of trust---agreement to sell, violation of---Scope---Breach of any term of agreement to sell does not fall foul of S. 406, P.P.C., as the agreement to sell is created under Contract act, 1872, where one party signifies his willingness to do or not to do anything against a consideration and if the same is accepted by the other party it becomes a promise whereas the said promise if enforceable by law creates the term "contract"---Hence, it is manifestly clear that any agreement requires an offer/proposal, acceptance, promise, consideration and enforceability then the same creates the reciprocal obligations agreed between the parties---agreement (between the parties) to perform the obligation whereas payment of money does not fall within the preview of "entrustment" of property in terms of S. 406, P.P.C., even otherwise, there is no misappropriation if the seller after receiving the sale consideration or part of sale consideration refuses to transfer the property or fails to abide the terms of agreement as the said failure or breach of terms cannot be equated with dishonest use, disposal of the property, violation of any legal contract, however, any breach of such agreement has a remedy under Specific Relief act, 1877, where one can seek specific performance of a contract if the same is enforceable by law and the court of law has to see which party is responsible for refusal or failure to abide by the terms of the contract---Specific Relief act, 1877 provides a mechanism which covers all those contracts between the parties which have been executed in terms of Contract act, 1872 and their remedies are only provided in Specific Relief act, 1877, where the ingredients of criminal breach of trust have no space as the concept of mens rea can only be assessed by the criminal court whereas the agreement does not fulfill the requirements of criminal breach of trust. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 149 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD MUSAWAR ABBASI VS State S. 497(5)---Bail, cancellation of---Scope---Ordinarily the Superior Courts are reluctant to interfere into the order extending concession of bail; rather they have shown reluctance to intervene in such like matters---Rationale behind is that once concession of bail is granted by a Court of competent jurisdiction then very strong and exceptional grounds would be required to hamper with the concession extended to an accused who is otherwise clothed with free life, as a consequence of concession and if any (contrary) view is taken by the Court it would be synonymous to curtailing the liberty of said accused prior to completion of trial, which otherwise is a precious right guaranteed under the Constitution. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 149 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD MUSAWAR ABBASI VS State S. 406---Criminal breach of trust---Essential ingredients---Scope---Essential ingredients for the offence of criminal breach of trust are (a) entrustment; (b) dishonest misappropriation or conversion to his own use by the person in whom the confidence is reposed; (c) dishonest use or disposal of property in violation of any direction of law; and (d) dishonest use or disposal of property in violation of any legal contract.

MUHAMMAD MUSAWAR ABBASI vs State S — 2023 PCrLJ 149 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 PCRLJ