1992 PLP 1477 (MLD)

5. The points for my determination in this case are as follows:‑ (i) Whether the accused are Directors of M/s. Classic International (Pvt.) Ltd. a ,private limited company, having its office at M‑2, Jawad Court, Plot No.SC‑11, Chandni Chouk, Main University Road, Karachi, the accused No.I? (ii) Whether the State Bank of Pakistan had reason to believe that accused No.1 were transacting illegal banking business in contravention of the provisions of section 27(1) of the Banking Companies Ordinance, 1962? (iii) Whether the accused failed to produce/supply relevant record/information concerning the business of accused No.1 when called upon to do so by the State Bank of Pakistan?

6. My findings on the above points are as follows:‑ (i) As under. (ii) As under. (iii) Not proved. REASONS.

7. POINTS NOSH. 2 and

3. Since the evidence on all the above points is common, hence for the sake of convenience they are being discussed together.

8. Mr. S.M. Khursheed, Deputy Director (P.W.1) has testified that the office of M/s. Classic International (Pvt.) Ltd:, Karachi, is. situated at Jawad Court, Karachi, the address given in complaint (Exh.2/6). It is also admitted by him that all the directives Exh.2/3, Exh.2/4 anti Exh.2/5) were sent to M/s. Classic International (Pvt.) Ltd. at the above address. The accused have denied this position by stating that they have got no office at M‑2, Jawad Court, Plot No.SC‑11, Chamlni Chouk, Main University Road, Karachi. They have produced certain letters of the State Bank of Pakistan through Mr: S.M. Khursheed (P.W.1), (Exh2/11, Exh2/12, Exh.2/13 and Exh.2/14), to prove that their registered office is situated at 43, Moosa Market Shahrah‑e‑Liaquat, Karachi, and the State Bank of Pakistan was in correspondence with them at this address. The. prosecution has failed to place on record any document to lend support to the case unfolded by the complainant in the complaint (Exh.2/6). In fact the documentary evidence available on record proves beyond and shadow of doubt that another company with distinct entity, viz., M/s. Pak Classic International (Pvt.) has its office at the address of accused No.1. The photograph (Exh.2/9) is clear on this point. The directive (Exh.2/10) shows the name of M/s. Pak. Classic International (Pvt.) Ltd., at the given address. In fact the other company, viz., M/s. Pak Classic International (Pvt.) Ltd. with the same address is also prosecuted by the State Bank of Pakistan vide complaint (Exh.10), which case is also being disposed of alongwith this case. Mr. Abu Bakar Bilwani (D.W.1) who is the Chartered Accountant, has made the entire position clear in the following words:‑ "I am working as Chartered Accountant at Karachi. M/s. Classic International (Pvt.) Ltd. was incorporated through us. The registered office of this company is 43‑Moosa Market, Shahrah‑e‑Liaquat, Karachi. lftikhar Ghani, Surayya Jabeen and Mrs. Bushra Iftikhar (Accused Nos.2 to 4) arc the directors of this company. After the institution of this case accused Iftikhar had contacted me seeking details about the registration of the company. We had gone to the office of Joint Registrar, where we learnt that no company with the above particulars was registered, but another company by name of Pak Classic International (Pvt.) Limited was registered, having its office at Jawad Court, Chandni Chowk, Karachi. I produce certified copy of the complaint in Criminal Case No.10 of 1989 against that company as Exh.10. The present directors arc not accused in that case."

9. All these factors when combined together establish that it was a case of mistaken identity and since the directives were not served upon accused No.1 at its correct address, the question of their non‑compliance does not arise. The contention of learned counsel for complainant that both M/s. Classic International (Pvt.) Ltd. and M/s. Pak Classic International (Pvt.) Ltd. are one and the same company, is devoid of any force. No such evidence was brought on record.

10. The circumstances mentioned above lead to the conclusion that the State Bank of Pakistan has filed the complaint without proper verification and has unnecessarily dragged the accused including two housewives in this case. The charge against the accused appears to be groundless and they arc accordingly acquitted. All the accused are on bail and they are discharged from their bail‑bonds. N.H.Q./S‑865/K Accused acquitted.