2009 PLP 911 (SCMR)
USMAN NASIR DAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2009 PLP 911 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Akhtar Shabbir and Syed Sakhi Hussain Bokhari, JJ |
| Parties | USMAN NASIR DAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP 911 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2009 PLP 911 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Muhammad Akhtar Shabbir and Syed Sakhi Hussain Bokhari, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP 911 (SCMR) (USMAN NASIR DAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Zahid Hussain Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Muhammad Anwar Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Muhammad Akhtar Shabbir, Advocate Supreme Court and Syed Fayyaz A. Sherazi, Advocate-on-Record for the Complainant.
- 3. We have heard the arguments of learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the complainant as well as the Assistant Prosecutor-General and perused the record with their kind assistance. The Suzuki Mehran car is the case property, the prosecution evidence has not yet been recorded by the trial Court. The learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner when asked to produce the registration book etc. of the car in question to prove its ownership, submitted that the "Al-Falah" Bank had financed the petitioner for purchase of the car, the instalment of Bank loan had neither been cleared as yet nor the Bank has transferred the car in favour of the petitioner. It means that it is leased vehicle and financial institution in case of default of any instalment can take the possession of the car. The petitioner has failed to establish the case of Superdari. Even otherwise the evidence of recovery of this vehicle has not been recorded by the trial Court.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order, dated 8-5-2003 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Criminal Revision No.49 of 2008).
S. 516-A
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)
Application for
Car in question which had been taken into possession by the Police was used in commission of offence in respect of which criminal case was registered at Police Station concerned
Request made by petitioner for Superdari of said car had been declined by the High Court
Petitioner who failed to produce Registration Book etc. of the car in question to prove its ownership, had submitted that Bank had financed him for the purchase of said car, but as instalment of Bank had not been cleared, the car had not yet been transferred in his name
Car being leased one, Financial institution/Bank in case of default of any instalment could take the possession of the car
Petitioner having failed to establish his ownership in respect of car in question, could not make out case for Superdari of car
Superdari of car was rightly denied to the petitioner by the High Court. Alamgir, A.P.-G. along with Muhammad Mansha, S.-I. Police Station Garhi Shahu, Lahore for the State. Muhammad Akhtar Shabbir, Advocate Supreme Court and Syed Fayyaz A. Sherazi, Advocate-on-Record for the Complainant.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AKHTAR SHABBIR, J.
The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the order, dated 8-5-2008 passed by learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Revision No.49 of 2008.
2. Brief history of the prosecution case is that Suzuki Mehran Car No. LWA-8731 has been taken into possession by the police being used in the commission of the offence. In this regard a case F.I.R. No.231 of 2007, dated 27-8-2007 under sections 324/148/149, P.P.C. was registered at Police Station Ghari Shahu, Lahore. The revision petition filed by the petitioner for "Superdari" of this vehicle has been declined by the High Court vide impugned order.
3. We have heard the arguments of learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the complainant as well as the Assistant Prosecutor-General and perused the record with their kind assistance. The Suzuki Mehran car is the case property, the prosecution evidence has not yet been recorded by the trial Court. The learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner when asked to produce the registration book etc. of the car in question to prove its ownership, submitted that the "Al-Falah" Bank had financed the petitioner for purchase of the car, the instalment of Bank loan had neither been cleared as yet nor the Bank has transferred the car in favour of the petitioner. It means that it is leased vehicle and financial institution in case of default of any instalment can take the possession of the car. The petitioner has failed to establish the case of Superdari. Even otherwise the evidence of recovery of this vehicle has not been recorded by the trial Court.
4. For the foregoing reasons we do not find any substance in this petition which is dismissed and leave refused. The petitioner may reagitate the matter after recording the evidence of the witness of memo of recovery of car at appropriate stage. H.B.T./U-5/SC Leave refused.