2010 PLP 940 (YLR)
BASHIR AHMED — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE — Respondent
| Citation | 2010 PLP 940 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Hafiz Abdul Rehman Ansari, J |
| Parties | BASHIR AHMED — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 PLP 940 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 PLP 940 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Hafiz Abdul Rehman Ansari, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2010 PLP 940 (YLR) (BASHIR AHMED — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Muhammad Latif Khokhar for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss.22-A & 154
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.489-F
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199
Constitutional petition--Issuing fake cheque
Petitioner had sought setting aside order passed by Justice of Peace for registration of criminal case against the petitioner under S.489-F, P.P.C. on the complaint of respondent
Contention of the petitioner was that a civil suit was pending before the civil court and injunction was issued with regard to cheque in dispute
Civil and criminal pro ceedings could proceed simultaneously
Factual controversy as to whether the petitioner had settled the account with the respondent or not, could only be resolved by the civil court; and High Court could not assume the role of investigator
Order passed by the Justice of Peace was quite in accordance with law
Petitioner could put all his version before the Investigating Officer, if in compliance of order passed by Justice of Peace, statement of respondent was recorded under S.154, Cr.P.C.
Factual controversy could not be resolved in constitutional petition
Criminal proceedings were not barred during pendency of civil proceedings. Haji Sardar Khalid Saleem v. Muhammad Ashraf and another 2006 SCMR 1192 ref.
Judgment & Decree
HAFIZ ABDUL REHMAN ANSARI, J.
Through this constitutional petition the petitioner seeks setting aside of order dated 8-1-2010 passed by the learned Justice of Peace/Additional Sessions Judge for registration of case against the petitioner under section 489-F, P.P.C. on the complaint of respondent No.3. Respondent No.3 filed petition under section 22-A of Cr.P.C. before the learned Justice of Peace/Additional Sessions Judge, Mailsi alleging that the petitioner issued cheque No.9002006 dated 16-2-2009 amounting to Rs.15,00,000 of account No.0120052305 Allied Bank Ltd which was dishonoured.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the civil suit is pending before the civil Court and injunction was issued with regard to the cheque in dispute. Learned counsel further contended that the petitioner has paid the whole amount of the cheque in dispute. The respondent No.3 is trying to falsely implicate the petitioner in the case under section 489-F, P.P.C. so the order passed by the learned Justice of Peace/Additional Sessions Judge for recording of the statement of respondent No.3 complainant under section 154, Cr.P.C. vide order dated 8-1-2010 be set aside.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. The civil and criminal proceedings can proceed simultaneously. The factual controversy whether the petitioner has settled the account with the respondent or not, can only be resolved by the civil Court and this Court cannot assume the role of an investigator. The order passed by learned Justice of Peace/Additional Sessions Judge is quite in accordance with law. The petitioner can put all his version before the Investigating Officer if in compliance of order passed by learned Justice of Peace statement of Muhammad Imran respondent No.3 is recorded under section 154, Cr.P.C. The factual controversy cannot be resolved in this constitutional petition. During the pendency of civil proceedings criminal proceedings are not barred. Reliance can be placed on a case titled "Haji Sardar Khalid Saleem v. Muhammad Ashraf and another" (2006 SCMR 1192). This writ petition has no merit and is dismissed in limine. H.B.T./B-2/L Petition dismissed.