| Case ID |
451dbef3-cc80-4982-a038-b8539d8882af |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.284 of 2011 |
| Decision Date |
Dec 21, 2011 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The impugned order of the Magistrate was deemed illegal and was set aside. The case was sent for trial after the restoration of the F.I.R., and the application was allowed. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of NASIR UDDIN SHAHAB vs THE STATE, adjudicated by the Sindh High Court on December 21, 2011, the petitioner challenged the Magistrate's decision to categorize his F.I.R. as 'B' Class under the Criminal Procedure Code of 1898, specifically section 561-A. The core of the dispute revolved around allegations of forgery, breach of trust, and cheating as outlined under the Penal Code sections 420, 468, 471, and 34. NASIR UDDIN SHAHAB, the applicant, had secured financial facilities from Bank Islami Pakistan Limited (BIPL) by providing collateral in the form of immovable properties. However, discrepancies emerged when a letter from BIPL to the Sub-Registrar claimed that certain properties were purchased through BIPL's financial facilities, leading to the issuance of declarations that the petitioner contested as forged. The Magistrate, influenced by a handwriting expert's report, accepted the F.I.R. without thoroughly investigating conflicting evidence, including reports from Faisal Bank Ltd. that indicated separate mortgage agreements predating the financial facilities from BIPL. The petitioner asserted that the accused had manipulated documents to falsely implicate him, thereby committing a criminal breach of trust. Referencing key legal precedents such as Noor Muhammad v. The State and Syed Muhammad Umer Shah v. Bashir Ahmed, the petitioner’s legal team argued that expert evidence should not overshadow substantial corroborative evidence. The court found merit in the petitioner's arguments, highlighting the inadequacies in the Magistrate's review of the evidence and the necessity for a comprehensive trial to address the complexities of the case. Consequently, the Sindh High Court set aside the Magistrate's order, mandated the restoration of the F.I.R., and directed the case to proceed to trial, thereby upholding the principles of fair legal scrutiny and due process in criminal proceedings. This decision underscores the judiciary's commitment to meticulously evaluating evidence and ensuring that administrative decisions do not override substantive legal rights and defenses. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Bank Islami Pakistan Limited (BIPL),
Faisal Bank Ltd.,
Sub-Registrar I, Clifton Town, Karachi
|
| Judges |
SALMAN HAMID, J
|
| Lawyers |
Shafiq Ahmed Rizvi for Applicant,
Ali Haider Saleem, A.P.G. for the State,
Jaffer Raza for Accused,
I.A. Hashmi for Bank Islami
|
| Petitioners |
NASIR UDDIN SHAHAB
|
| Respondents |
THE STATE
|
| Citations |
2012 SLD 2228,
2012 CLD 866
|
| Other Citations |
Noor Muhammad v. The State 2005 SCMR 1958,
Syed Muhammad Umer Shah v. Bashir Ahmed 2004 SCMR 1859,
Anwar Ahmed v. Nafis Bano through Legal Heirs 2005 SCMR 152,
Ali Ahmed alias Ali Ahmed Mia v. The State PLD 1962 SC 102
|
| Laws Involved |
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898),
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
|
| Sections |
561-A,
420,
468,
471,
34
|