MLD 2012

2012 PLP 1024 (MLD)

Messrs WARID TELECOM (PVT.) LTD. — Applicant Versus THE STATE and 2 others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Sindh
Decided Date
2011-December-14
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2012 PLP 1024 (MLD)
Forum / Court Sindh
Bench Members N/A
Parties Messrs WARID TELECOM (PVT.) LTD. — Applicant Versus THE STATE and 2 others — Respondents
Primary Law Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2012 PLP 1024 (MLD)?

This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2012 PLP 1024 (MLD)?

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

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2012 PLP 1024 (MLD) (Messrs WARID TELECOM (PVT.) LTD. — Applicant Versus THE STATE and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Representation

  • Abdullah Rajput, A.P.-G. for Respondent.

Headnotes / Summary

Ss. 420 & 406

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 561-A

Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property, criminal breach of trust

Accused (respondent) was given an official car during his employment with company (petitioner)

Upon termination of employment of accused, he was asked by the company to return the said vehicle, but accused refused to return the same

Company lodged an F.I.R. against the accused but Investigating Officer recommended disposal of the F.I.R. under C-Class with the reasoning that there seemed to be a civil dispute relating to the return of the vehicle as accused contended that as per practice of the company, he was entitled to purchase the vehicle on depreciated value upon termination of his employment

Validity

As per practice of the company, accused was entitled to purchase the vehicle on depreciated value, for which an offer was also made to him

Case under Ss. 406 & 420 of P.P.C was hardly made out in the circumstances of the case

Report submitted by Investigating Officer was rightly accepted by the Magistrate, whereby F.I.R. was disposed of under C-Class

Application of company in circumstances was not maintainable, and consequently was dismissed.

Judgment & Decree

SALMAN HAMID, J.

Through this Criminal Miscellaneous Application under section 561-A, Criminal Procedure Code, 1898, Warid Telecom (Pvt.) Limited, (Petitioner) has challenged the Order dated 17-10-2011, passed by VIth Judicial Magistrate, Karachi-East, (VI JM) in Crime No.217 of 2011 of Police Station Bahadurabad, lodged under sections 420 and 406 Pakistan Penal Code against respondent No.3. After investigation the I.O. recommended disposal of F.I.R. under C-Class. Facts deducible from the file are that the respondent No.3 was employed with the petitioner and during his employment he was given an official car Honda Civic ARV-849 (Vehicle). After termination of his service contract on 27-1-2011 he was asked to return back the Vehicle which he did not return. Eight months after termination of service contract, petitioner lodged F.I.R. on or about 6-9-2011. The matter was investigated into and it was reported by the I/O that there seems to be a civil dispute relating to the return of Vehicle as according to respondent No.3 he, as per practice of respondent No.3(sic) was entitled to purchase the Vehicle on depreciated value upon termination of employment contract and that it was also agreed by the petitioners. It also came on record that a civil suit is pending adjudication in respect of the above Vehicle which fact however was disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Admittedly respondent No.3 was employed on contract and that his contract was terminated. During employment he was using the Vehicle and as per practice of petitioner the respondent No.3 was entitled to purchase it (Vehicle) on depreciated value, for which offer was also made. Looking to this aspect of the matter the case under sections 420 and 406 Pakistan Penal Code was hardly made out. Report having been submitted by the I/O was rightly accepted by the Magistrate concerned whereby she disposed of the F.I.R. under C-Class which required no interference of this Court. The Criminal Miscellaneous Application under the above facts and circumstances of the case, is not maintainable and is hereby dismissed. M.W.A./W-6/K Revision dismissed.