Citation Name: 2025 MLD 1033 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Abdul Khalid Saleem vs Imran Hyder Pre

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

Citation Name: 2025 MLD 1033 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Abdul Khalid Saleem VS Imran Hyder Pre-requisites---Remedy for wrongful implication through false FIRs---Suit for damages---Frivolous litigation discouraged---Award of damages justified ---Un-crossed examination in chief ---No evidentiary value---A suit for damages for malicious prosecution was filed by the respondent against the petitioner which emanated from FIR No.133/2018 lodged under Ss.420/448/506-B, P.P.C.---Suit was decreed for Rs.12 million---Appeal against the decision of Trial Court was dismissed---The legal point for determination in the whole proceedings was as to "whether the test for malicious prosecution was correctly applied by the courts below" ---Held: The Supreme Court has time and again disparaged the tendency of frivolous litigation---Lodging of false FIRs has unfortunately become a norm which can only be curbed by awarding damages in favour of the individual who was wronged---Admittedly an FIR No. 133/2018 was initiated by the appellant under Ss.420/448/506-B, P.P.C.---It was also admitted that the prosecution ended in the favour of respondent---It was evident from perusal of the judgment of the Trial Court in the criminal case that the Trial Court specifically adjudicated that it was a "case of no evidence" and no evidence had been given by the appellant to connect the respondent with the alleged offence---It was also evident from the examination and perusal of the record that the appellant effected appearance in the suit, filed written statement and also filed his affidavit-in-evidence, however, the appellant despite being given repeated chances failed to appear for his deposition and only restricted himself to the cross-examination of the respondent---The argument of the counsel that the appellant was condemned unheard, was unwarranted for the reason that the said appellant participated in the proceedings and subsequently even cross-examined the respondent---The examination in chief filed by the appellant, in the absence of him being subjected to the test of cross-examination, was rightly not considered by the Trial Court and therefore not taken into adjudication---No substantial error or defect could be pointed out in the impugned judgment---The appeal was dismissed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2025 MLD 1033 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Abdul Khalid Saleem vs Imran Hyder Pre-requisites — 2025 MLD 1033 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 MLD