2020 P Cr (PLP)
ABDUL MUTALLIB — Petitioner Versus The STATE through Custom Collector Sost Dry Port Gojal Hunza — Respondent
| Citation | 2020 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ABDUL MUTALLIB — Petitioner Versus The STATE through Custom Collector Sost Dry Port Gojal Hunza — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2020 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2020 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2020 P Cr (PLP) (ABDUL MUTALLIB — Petitioner Versus The STATE through Custom Collector Sost Dry Port Gojal Hunza — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Amjad Hussain for Petitioner.
- Syed Riaz Kazmi, Legal Advisor for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 516-A
Customs Act (IV of 1969), Ss. 156(1), 89, 157 & 178
Smuggling and confiscation of goods
Petitioner was bona fide owner of the vehicle in question as evinced by registration documents issued by Gilgit-Baltistan Registration & Transport Authority
No rival claimant had claimed ownership of the said vehicle
Petitioner had properly maintained documents of the vehicle
Retention of vehicle by the customs authorities for an indefinite period would mean nothing except complete decay, damage and deterioration of the vehicle in question
Petition was allowed, in circumstances. [Para. 5 of the judgment]
Judgment & Decree
ALI BAIG, J.
This is a petition filed by the petitioner namely Abdul Mutalib son of Yousuf Ali resident of Bola Khan Hammari, Tehsil Nagar Khas, District Nagar for release of vehicle Mini Truck bearing Registration No. NGR-735 on superdari till disposal of case FIR No.01/2019 dated 11-12-2019 registered under sections 2(S) and 16 read with S.R.O. 566(I)/2009 dated 06-06-2005 and section 3(1) of Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1950 punishable under sections 156(1)89, 157 and 178 of the Customs Act, 1969 at Customs Check Post Sost Gojal. The said vehicle was impounded by Custom authorities at Sost.
2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is bona fide owner of the aforesaid vehicle and it was hired by one Zahid Hussain, Driver. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further argued that the petitioner is not involved in the aforementioned criminal case. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further argued that there is no rival claimant of the said vehicle, therefore, by accepting this petition, the vehicle be given to the petitioner on superdari and the said vehicle will be produced in the trial court as and when required.
3. Conversely, the learned counsel for the respondent/Legal Advisor Custom vehemently opposed this petition by contending that the vehicle in question has been used in the aforementioned occurrence/ crime, therefore, petitioner is not entitled for getting the vehicle in question on superdari.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case.
5. Admittedly, the petitioner is bona fide owner of the vehicle in question as evinced by registration documents issued by Gilgit-Baltistan Registration Transport authority Nagar. No rival claimant has claimed ownership of the said vehicle. The petitioner has properly maintained documents of the said vehicle. Retention of vehicle by customs authorities for an indefinite period would mean nothing except complete decay, damage and deterioration of vehicle in question which cannot be allowed under the provisions of law.
6. For what has been discussed above, this petition is allowed. Consequently, the respondent is directed to handover the aforesaid vehicle to the petitioner forthwith on superdari subject to his furnishing personal security bonds in the sum of Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lac) to the satisfaction of Registrar of this Court. The petitioner is also directed not to sell or transfer the vehicle in question till decision of case FIR No.01 /2019 and he shall produce the same before the learned trial court as and when required by the competent court. This order will not prejudice the rights of a rival claimant, if any, with better title. This petition is disposed of in the above terms. File. ADN/8/GB Petition allowed.