Mirza Arslan Baig vs State S — 2026 PCrLJ 980 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.

Mirza Arslan Baig VS State S. 489-F---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.417(2-A)---Dishonestly issuing a cheque---Appreciation of evidence---Appeal against acquittal---Accused was charged for issuing cheque amounting to Rs. forty lakhs to complainant in lieu of cash amount of complainant given to accused on profit basis, for agriculture business, which was dishonoured due to insufficient funds---Complainant admitted during his cross-examination that he did not obtain any receipt of the payment of Rs. 21,00,000/- to the accused---Complainant also admitted that he was an employee and not a businessman, and his salary was Rs. 50,000/= per month, with monthly savings up to Rs. 30,000/----However, complainant was unable to establish in evidence from where did he obtain such a huge amount---Complainant attempted to improve his case in evidence for the first time by claiming that two of his brothers had also invested in the principal amount---Complainant also produced an agreement dated 27-08-2020, allegedly made between him and accused after more than two years of handing over the alleged cash amount---However, such an agreement was completely silent about any agricultural business---Moreover, neither complainant nor his witnesses deposed any description of the agricultural business---Complainant claimed that the agreement was executed in presence of witnesses---On the contrary, one of the witnesses admitted in his evidence that he had no knowledge about the terms and conditions settled in between the complainant and the accused, nor any knowledge about any profit amount---Said witness also admitted that the alleged agreement was prepared by the complainant---Said witness also admitted that the handwriting on the subject cheque was of the complainant and not of the accused---Despite claiming to be the alleged co-investor of the principal amount and despite being the alleged marginal witness of the said agreement, said witness did not support the complainant's version, nor did he know anything about the terms and conditions of the alleged agreement---Sanctity, authenticity and existence of such belated agreement, therefore, became doubtful---Said witness also admitted that the complainant was employed and was not doing business, as claimed in the FIR---Complainant's handwriting, both on the cheque and on the agreement, casted serious doubts on the entire allegations---Investigating Officer also admitted that neither did he verify the stamp paper of said agreement, nor did he record the statement of any independent person, to testify about the said transaction whereas, witness and the complainant were both real brothers---Complainant therefore utterly failed to establish the handing over of an amount of Rs.21,00,000/- cash to the accused---Complainant also failed to bring on record any specification and detail of his alleged business---Complainant's claim of doing business was contradicted by a witness---Complainant had, therefore, failed to bring forward any reliable proof which could substantiate that the cheque in question was for the fulfillment of any obligation, so also the consequential 'dishonesty' against the accused---Once the accused had denied the very existence of any transaction between the parties, the primary burden to prove the same was on the complainant; however, it appeared that the complainant utterly failed to establish the existence of any obligation and agreement between the complainant and the accused; most of his statements remained un-established---Witness also contradicted his statement in the FIR, the Investigating Officer also could not support complainant; and lastly, he also contradicted his own statement---Appeal against acquittal was dismissed, in circumstances.

Mirza Arslan Baig vs State S — 2026 PCrLJ 980 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PCRLJ