Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 1506 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Adnan Abdul Raheem vs State Ss

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 PCrLJ 1506 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Adnan Abdul Raheem VS State Ss. 22-a & 561-a---Quashing of order---Petition filed by the respondent under S.22-a, Cr.P.C., for the registration of criminal case was accepted by the Ex-officio Justice of Peace---Validity---Record showed that the complainant supplied oil product to "CR" Store on credit between 19.03.2020 to 15.01.2024, accruing an outstanding liability of Rs. 5,694,274/- and to settle that, "CR" Store issued eight cheques for Rs. 700,000/- each, which were dishonoured due to insufficient funds---applicant was merely an employee of the store and had no direct or indirect contractual relationship with the complainant/respondent---Cheques in question were issued by "CR" Store and not by the applicant---Bank account from which the cheques were drawn belonged to "CR" Store and the applicant had no ownership, control, or financial authority over the store's transactions---applicant was neither a director, partner nor a shareholder of "CR" Store---applicant had no financial stake in the business and there was no evidence to suggest that he was involved in issuing or authorizing the disputed cheques---Dishonored cheques were not signed nor issued by the applicant and his name did not appear as an authorized signatory in the bank records of "CR" Store---No record to the extent that he played any role in the issuance of those cheques---applicant was not involved in any financial dealings between "CR" Store and the complainant/respondent---Transactions were conducted at the corporate level and the applicant had no decision-making authority in the company's financial matters---Since the applicant had no control over the financial transactions, he could not be held criminally liable for the dishonor of cheques issued by a third party---Complainant/respondent had wrongly implicated the applicant in order to pressurize the actual responsible parties (i.e., the owners of "CR" Store) into settling the dispute, that was a clear abuse of process---applicant could not be made to suffer for a matter in which he had no involvement---Law must be interpreted in a fair and balanced manner, ensuring that its protection is extended to all individuals without being used as a tool for harassment or coercion---Liability for action rested solely with the individual who committed them---Consequently, imposing culpability on the applicant for the conduct of the main accused, in the absence of prima facie cogent evidence, was legally indefensible---On the basis of material available on the record, no case was made out against the applicant---Petition was allowed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 1506 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Adnan Abdul Raheem vs State Ss — 2025 PCrLJ 1506 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PCRLJ