Cheque with name or bearer. The petitioner contended that the wording "Pay cash or bearer" renders the check illegal as it allows the cashing of any person and not a specific person, but The court declared it legally correct- 2024 C L D 30


	Check with name or bearer.	The petitioner contended that the wording "Pay cash or bearer" renders the check illegal as it allows the cashing of any person and not a specific person, but The court declared it legally correct-		2024 C L D 3

2024 C.L.D. 30 کیس میں درج ذیل اہم نکات ہیں:

1. نیکوٹیبل انسٹرومنٹس ایکٹ (Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881):

درخواست گزار نے دعویٰ کیا تھا کہ چیک کی قانونی حیثیت اس کے مطابق نہیں ہے اور یہ سیکشن 5 کے تحت درست نہیں۔

چیک پر "Pay cash or bearer" کی عبارت تھی، جس کی بنیاد پر عدالت نے اس کی درستگی کو مسترد کر دیا۔

اگر چیک پر "Pay cash" اور "or bearer" کی عبارت نکالی نہ گئی ہو تو اس میں موجود شخص کو ہولڈر ان ڈیو کورس تصور کیا جائے گا۔

2. سی آر پی سی (Cr.P.C.) کی سیکشن 249-A:

درخواست گزار نے سیکشن 249-A کے تحت درخواست دائر کی تھی تاکہ اس کے خلاف الزامات کو بے بنیاد قرار دے کر بری کیا جائے۔

عدالت نے اس درخواست کو مسترد کر دیا اور کہا کہ اس کیس میں سیکشن 249-A کی شرائط پورا نہیں ہوتیں کیونکہ الزامات کا سامنا کرنے والے شخص کی جانب سے تردید نہیں کی گئی تھی اور چیک پر اس کے دستخط اور اکاؤنٹ کا وجود تسلیم کیا گیا تھا۔

3. مقدمہ کی کارروائی کی معطلی:

درخواست گزار نے سیکشن 561-A Cr.P.C. کے تحت مقدمے کی کارروائی کو معطل کرنے کی درخواست دی۔

عدالت نے کہا کہ سیکشن 561-A، Cr.P.C. صرف غیر معمولی حالات میں استعمال کیا جا سکتا ہے تاکہ کسی مقدمے کی کارروائی کو روکا جا سکے، اور اس کیس میں ایسی کوئی صورت نہیں تھی جس سے کارروائی کو معطل کیا جائے۔

4. ثبوت اور شواہد:

درخواست گزار نے یہ دعویٰ کیا تھا کہ پولیس کی تفتیش نے اس کے دفاع کو ثابت کیا، تاہم عدالت نے کہا کہ پولیس کا رپورٹ صرف تفتیش کی رپورٹ ہے، یہ خود ثبوت نہیں ہے۔

عدالت نے کہا کہ چیک کی نوعیت اور اس کی قانونی حیثیت کو ثابت کرنے کا موقع ٹرائل پر ملے گا، جہاں دونوں فریقین کو شواہد پیش کرنے کا حق حاصل ہے۔

5. سیاسی اور سماجی مفاد:

عدالت نے کہا کہ سیکشن 249-A، Cr.P.C. کا مقصد معاشرتی مفاد اور فرد کے حقوق کے درمیان توازن قائم کرنا ہے تاکہ ان افراد کو مکمل ٹرائل سے بچایا جا سکے جن کے خلاف الزامات ثابت نہ ہوں۔

یہ کیس بنیادی طور پر چیک کی قانونی حیثیت، ثبوت کی نوعیت، اور کیس کی کارروائی کو معطل کرنے کے اختیارات پر مرکوز تھا۔

2024 C L D 30

[Lahore]

Before Tariq Saleem Sheikh, J

AHMAD FARAN SABIR---Petitioner

Versus

The STATE and another---Respondents

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 8564/M of 2022, heard on 26th May, 2022.

(a) Negotiable Instruments Act (XXVI of 1881)---

----Ss. 5 & 118---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 249-A & 561-A---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 489-F---Presumptions as to negotiable instrument--- Petitioner moved an application under S. 249-A, Cr.P.C., before the Trial Court for his acquittal claiming that the charge against him was groundless and there was no probability of him being convicted of any offence---Said application was dismissed---Decision of the Trial Court was upheld in revision by the Revisional Court---Validity---Petitioner had neither denied his signature on Cheque in question nor the fact that it was drawn on his account---Petitioner had challenged its validity on the premise that it did not conform to the requirements of S. 5 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881---Cheque in question contained the expression "Pay cash or bearer"---In view of the said discourse, the contention was repelled---Allegedly, police had found defence plea of petitioner correct during investigation, which might help him during the trial but not at present stage---Investigating Officer had the mandate only to collect the evidence pertaining to the case he was investigating and to dig out the truth and then submit report in terms of S. 173, Cr.P.C.---Said report, however, was not a piece of evidence itself---If the cheque said "pay cash" and the words "or bearer" were not scored off, the person in possession of the instrument would be presumed to be a holder in due course---In the instant case, respondent No. 2 (complainant) enjoyed the same presumption in respect of Cheque in question which could be rebutted at a regular trial where the parties have equal opportunity to adduce evidence to prove their respective claims and test the credibility of the witnesses of the other side through cross-examination---Sole opinion of the Investigating Officer could not negate that presumption---Section 249-A, Cr.P.C., reflected a compromise between the collective good of the society and the rights of an individual offender---Idea was to spare the offender the rigors of full trial if the Court at any stage found that the charge was groundless and the prosecution was not likely to succeed, however, present case was not a case in which the provisions of S. 249-A, Cr.P.C., could be invoked---Petition had no merit and was therefore dismissed.

Muhammad Sultan v. The State 2010 SCMR 806; North and South Insurance Corporation Limited v. National Provincial Bank Limited, [1936] 1 K.B. 328; Cole v. Milsome, [1951] All ER 311; Orbit Mining and Trading Co. Ltd. v. Westminster Bank Ltd., [1963] 1 QB 794; Col. Shah Sadiq v. Muhammad Ashiq and others 2006 SCMR 276 and Muhammad Bashir v. Station House Officer Okara Cantt. and others PLD 2007 SC 539 rel.

(b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---

----Ss. 249-A & 561-A--- Quashing of proceedings--- Inherent jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---In law, S. 561-A, Cr.P.C., did not confer an alternative or additional jurisdiction on the High Court---Said provisions of law merely preserve it's inherent jurisdiction to enable it to make such orders as might be necessary to give effect to an order under the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 or to prevent the abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice---Said section could not be used to stifle prosecution---High Court should invoke S. 561-A, Cr.P.C., for quashing the proceedings pending before the Trial Court in exceptional circumstances.

Ijaz Feroze and Zia Ullah Khan for Petitioner.

Rana Tasawar Ali Khan, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State.

Abdul Khaliq Safrani and Muhammad Awaiz Riaz for Respondent No. 2.

For more information call us 0092-324-4010279 Whatsapp Dear readers if u like this post plz comments and follow us. Thanks for reading .as you know our goal is to aware people of their rights and how can get their rights. we will answer every question, so we need your help to achieve our goal. plz tell people about this blog and subscribe to our youtube channel and follow us at the end of this post.