2008 PLP 1107 (MLD)
NAFEES IQBAL — Applicant Versus THE STATE-.-Respondent
| Citation | 2008 PLP 1107 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Munib Ahmad Khan, J |
| Parties | NAFEES IQBAL — Applicant Versus THE STATE-.-Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 1107 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 1107 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Munib Ahmad Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 1107 (MLD) (NAFEES IQBAL — Applicant Versus THE STATE-.-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 516-A, 517 & 561-A
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.392/34
Custody and disposal of case property pending trial
Applicant whose car was stolen and F.I.R. was registered at Police Station, had submitted that when he made application to the Trial Court, he was required to furnish a surety and in lieu thereof registration of vehicle in question was retained and vehicle had been released
Applicant had submitted that he was ready to give an undertaking that he would produce the subject vehicle as and when required
State counsel had added that direction be issued to the concerned registering Authority of motor vehicles through the Trial Court and documents of vehicle be retained
Held, purpose of binding the applicant to produce vehicle in dispute, could be achieved after a direction was issued to the concerned Registering Authority of vehicles to maintain status quo and not to transfer the said vehicle in the name of any person, while the undertaking of applicant be kept on record
When applicant had already suffered at the hands of criminal, he should not be burdened further and should not be treated like the criminal
Impugned order was set aside, with direction that applicant was to submit an undertaking and P. R. Bond before the Trial Court and said court was directed to return the documents and to issue directions to the concerned Registering Authority of motor vehicles not to transfer said vehicle in the name of any body till decision of the matter. Aamir Mansoob Qureshi for Applicant. Haji Abdul Majeed for the State.
Judgment & Decree
MUNIB AHMAD KHAN, J.
The short controversy involved in the matter, as stated by learned counsel for the applicant, is that the applicant is the owner of subject vehicle i.e. Car bearing Registration No.AJS-096, Make: Honda City, Model-2005, vide Engine No.LIZA2-1023606 and Chassis No. NEBGE-15A95R123607, which was stolen and an F.I.R. No.45 of 2007 was registered at Police Station Gizri, Karachi. He submits that when he made an application to the District and Sessions Judge, Karachi (South) then he was required to furnish a surety-in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 and in lieu thereof the registration of subject vehicle is retained and the same has been released. He submits that he is ready to give an undertaking that he will produce the subject vehicle as and when required and it should have sufficiently satisfied the learned District and Sessions Judge about the intention of applicant. Haji Abdul Majeed, learned State counsel has added that direction be issued to the concerned Registering Authority of motor vehicles through learned District and Sessions Judge and documents of its be retained. Exercising the right of rebuttal and in aid of his above contention, learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the case laws reported in 2005 PCr.LJ 1510 and 2007 PCr.LJ 166 and stated that in the given authorities even the applicant was not required to produce the car. Keeping in view the above submissions of both the learned counsel, I have observed that the purpose of binding the applicant to produce the subject vehicle can be achieved after a direction is issued to the concerned Registering Authority of motor vehicles to maintain status-quo and not to transfer the said vehicle in the name of any person while the undertaking of applicant be kept on record. In such type of matter when the applicant has already suffered at the hands of criminal, he should not be burdened further and should not be treated like the criminal. In such a situation, the impugned order, dated 26-3-2007 passed by learned District and Sessions Judge, Karachi (South) is hereby set aside with direction that the applicant to submit an undertaking and P.R. Bond before the Court of said District and Sessions Judge, Karachi (South) and the said learned District and Sessions Judge is directed to return the document and to issue directions to the concerned Registering Authority of motor vehicles not to transfer the said vehicle in the name of anybody till decision of the matter. In the light of above discussion, the instant criminal revision application stands disposed of. H.B.T./N-14/K Order accordingly.