MLD 2005

2005 PLP 1843 (MLD)

SAJJAD HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus S.P. CITY, MULTAN and 3 others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
2005-June-23
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2005 PLP 1843 (MLD)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties SAJJAD HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus S.P. CITY, MULTAN and 3 others — Respondents
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 1843 (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 2005 PLP 1843 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 1843 (MLD) (SAJJAD HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus S.P. CITY, MULTAN and 3 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Ch. Muhammad Anwar-ul-Haq, for Petitioner.
  • M.R. Khalid Malik Addl.A.-G. along with Fayyaz Ahmad Khan, Inspector/SHO and Khalid Mahmood S.-I. for Respondents.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 517

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199

Constitutional Petition

Detention of vehicle at Police Station

Acquittal of accused

Effect

F.I.R. lodged against petitioner regarding car in question, having been found false, petitioner was acquitted of charge finally, but despite his acquittal Police took the car in question into possession from petitioner and detained the same at Police Station

Police could not decide about the fate of car and possession thereof under any provisions of Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 was unlawful when a Court of competent jurisdiction had already acquitted petitioner and no appeal had been filed against said order which had attained finality

Police had no authority to intercept car in question after acquittal of petitioner from the case without any orders of the Court of competent jurisdiction

Such action of police was declared to be illegal and without any lawful authority

High Court accepting Constitutional petition, directed Police to hand over car in question to petitioner, immediately

Complainant, however could seek alternate remedy provided under law.

Judgment & Decree

IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, J.

The petitioner claims that his car bearing Registration No.RNE/3600 has been taken into possession by the police without any justification. According to the petitioner earlier F.I.R. No.240 of 2003 was got lodged against him by Akbar Abbas, A respondent No.4 regarding the same car and the same having been found false, the petitioner was acquitted of the charge, which order has attained the finality, but in spite of that the S.H.O./respondent No.3 in connivance with respondent No.4 has illegally taken into possession the said car from the petitioner and detained at the police station.

2. The S.H.O. states that an information was received on telephone No. 15 about the theft of the car and same was taken into possession as respondent No.4 claimed to be its owner and the matter has been referred to the learned Ilaqa Magistrate.

3. Admittedly the petitioner has been acquitted of the case earlier got lodged by respondent No.4 and the car in question was in possession of the petitioner. The police cannot decide about the fate of the car or possession of the 'car under any provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code when a Court of competent jurisdiction has already acquitted the petitioner and no appeal has been filed against the said order, which has attained the finality. The S.H.O./respondent No.3 had no authority to intercept the car in question after the acquittal of the petitioner from the case without any orders by the Court of competent jurisdiction, which action is declared to be illegal and without any lawful authority. Consequently, this writ petition is accepted and the S.H.O./respondent No.3 is directed to hand over the vehicle in question to the petitioner immediately. However, Akbar Abbas, respondent No.4 can seek alternate remedy provided under the law. H.B.T./S-404/L Petition accepted.