SAFEER HUSSAIN vs CAPITAL CITY POLICE OFFICER, LAHORE Ss — 2026 CLD 303 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

SAFEER HUSSAIN VS CAPITAL CITY POLICE OFFICER, LAHORE Ss. 2(a), 4 & 20(4)---Microfinance Institutions Ordinance (LV of 2001), S. 2(ia)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 489-F---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Quashing of FIR---Dishonoring of cheque---Repayment of loan---Financial institution and Microfinance institution---Distinction---Petitioner/accused sought quashing of FIR registered on dishonouring of cheque issued for repayment of loan---Validity---Scope of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 is fundamentally different from that of Microfinance Institutions Ordinance, 2001---Provisions of Microfinance Institution Ordinance, 2001 are sector-specific, focused exclusively on microfinance institutions serving underprivileged and microenterprises segments---Provisions of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 are broad in coverage and apply to wide range of financial institutions falling within statutory definition of a "financial institution" under S. 2(a) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001---Nature of respondent/complainant's business activities squarely fell within the ambit of the term "financial institution" under S. 2(a)(i) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001---Any obligations arising from financial accommodations extended by respondent/complainant fell within the jurisdiction of Banking Court under Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001---First Information Report registered by respondent/complainant under S. 489-F, P.P.C. stated that petitioner/ accused obtained a "loan" from it and gave cheque in question for its repayment which was dishonoured on presentation---Parties acknowledged that petitioner/accused was covered under the definition of "customer" and the cheque was given for the repayment of "finance" and fulfilment of an "obligation" as defined in S. 2 of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001---Respondent/ complainant was a financial institution within the meaning of S. 2(a) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 and cheque had been issued for the repayment of finance, the alleged offence fell exclusively under S. 20(4) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 and the provision of S. 489-F, P.P.C. did not apply---Banking Court had exclusive jurisdiction over such matters under S. 7 of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001---Any prosecution against petitioner/accused had to be initiated through a complaint before Banking Court as prescribed under Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001---High Court in exercise of Constitution jurisdiction quashed the FIR registered against petitioner/accused---High Court clarified that respondent/complainant was not precluded from filing a complaint under S. 7 of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 before Banking Court for prosecution under S. 20(4) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001---Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances.

SAFEER HUSSAIN vs CAPITAL CITY POLICE OFFICER, LAHORE Ss — 2026 CLD 303 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 CLD