Atta Muhammad vs State

Judgment Sheet

IN THE PESHAWAR HIGH COURT, PESHAWAR

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

JUDGMENT

Cr. M/QP No.29-P/2015 Date of hearing......26/02/2015

Atta Muhammad .....Vs.........The State Petitioner(s) by Mr. Ibrar Alam Advocate.

Respondent(s) by Nemo being motion case.

ABDUL LATIF KHAN, J:- Through instant petition, the petitioner seeks quashment of impugned orders dated 06.09.2014 and 07.02.2015 of the learned lower Courts whereby his petitions for return of vehicle bearing registration No.TBP-0154 Model 2003 Chassis No.NAE3230481, Engine

No.NZE962252 Corolla, were rejected.

2.The vehicle in question was taken into possession by the local police u/s 523/550 Cr.PC vide Mad No.11 dated 23.08.2014, from the house of one Tariq Nawaz, on which registration No.1460- KPK was installed. On query, the said Tariq Nawaz produced registration copy of the same in the name of one Said Alam which during inquiry u/s 156(3)

Cr.PC was found bogus. Consequently a case vide FIR No.547 dated 26.8.2014 u/s 420/468/471 PPC was registered at P.S.MRS, Kohat against accused Tariq Nawaz.

3.The petitioner approached the lower Court for the custody of vehicle in question being its lawful owner but his petition was dismissed vide order dated 06.09.2014. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Peshawar who also dismissed the revision petition of petitioner vide order dated 07.02.2015, hence the instant quashment petition.

Arguments heard record perused.

4.Perusal of record reveals that the vehicle in question was taken into custody by local police u/s 523/550 Cr.PC from the house of one Tariq Nawaz who disclosed himself to be owner of the vehicle in question and also produced registration document in the name of one said Alam, which was found bogus.

5.It is also admitted fact that the vehicle in question is non-custom paid vehicle and its

registration has been found bogus and fake on inquiry from the concerned registration office.

Petitioner failed to produce any plausible explanation regarding plying of the vehicle outside the area permitted to him and handing over the same to the said Tariq Nawaz, who was found in possession of the same for which he produced fake documents. The record is also silent about taking of vehicle by petitioner outside the limits of the area which was allowed only within the limits of Bannu.

There is clearly mentioned in the Form of Temporary Registration produced by petitioner that the vehicle would be driven by the person in whose name the vehicle is registered and the said registration would be valid only within the limits of Bannu. So far as contention of learned counsel for petitioner that the vehicle was taken by petitioner for carrying his ill wife the same is misplaced, as it is nowhere mentioned in the said document that the vehicle could be plied/taken outside Bannu, in emergency situation. Besides, the said vehicle has been recovered outside the limits of Bannu and also not from possession of petitioner rather it was

recovered from the house of one Tariq Nawaz situated at Kohat who produced fake documents regarding the vehicle in question showing himself to be its owner so it also became a case property in referred criminal case therefore, the vehicle cannot be returned to the petitioner on superdari as he failed to make out a case for entitlement of the vehicle on superdari.

6.For the aforesaid reasons, this petition being devoid of merit is dismissed.

Announced.

Dt.26.02.2015.

JUDGE

“A.Qayum”