Shams-ud-Din S/O Haji Khan vs Hazoor Bakhsh And Others

Balochistan High Court · 2025 · Before Hon'ble Justice Sardar Ahmed Haleemi

by the learned Judicial Magistrate MFC Sariab-II, Quetta (hereinafter the “trial Court”), whereby respondents No. 1 to 3 were acquitted of the charge on the application under section 249-A, Cr.P .C.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the complainant Shams-ud-Din lodged an FIR No. 224 of 2024 under sections 420, 465, 468, 471, 34, P .P .C.at Police Station Sariab, Quetta to the effect that he received a court notice on 24.10.2024 from the Court of Senior Civil Judge-II, Sariab, Quetta, in a matter of which he had no prior knowledge. Upon inquiry, the complainant discovered that respondent No. 1 had allegedly submitted a forged agreement bearing the complainant’s fake signature and thumb impression. Consequently, the aforementioned FIR was registered against the respondents.

3. After the registration of the FIR, respondents No. 1 to 3 were arrested, and a challan of the case was submitted before the learned trial Court. The charge was duly framed. Thereafter, at the Criminal Acquittal Appeal No. 139 of 2025 - 2 - Only for viewing purpose. Contact office for certified copy. stage fixed for recording prosecution evidence, an application under Section 249-A, Cr.P .C.was moved by the respondents. The same was allowed by the trial Court vide impugned order, thereby acquitting respondents No. 1 to 3 of the charge, hence this Criminal Acquittal Appeal.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and carefully examined the material available on record, which reveals that the entire case of the prosecution is based on the allegation that a forged document was used by the respondents in judicial proceedings. However, despite the serious nature of this allegation, no expert opinion from the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) was obtained to verify the authenticity of the signatures or thumb impression appearing on the alleged forged agreement.

5. Moreover, the complainant alleged that the acquitted respondents had filed a forged agreement in the court of learned Senior Civil Judge-II, Saraib, but the complainant has not placed tangible evidence on record to establish that the document in question was forged or fabricated. In the absence of any cooperative record or corroboration, the mere allegations of forgery without a forensic report cannot form an offence. In addition to this, Section 196 Cr.P .C is relevant, which reads as follows: Prosecution for offences against the State No Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under Chapter VI or IX-A of the Pakistan Penal Code (except section 127), or punishable under section 108-A, or section 153-A, or section 294-A, or section 295-A or section 505 Criminal Acquittal Appeal No. 139 of 2025 - 3 - Only for viewing purpose. Contact office for certified copy. of the same Code, unless upon complaint made by order of, or under authority from, the Central Government, or the Provincial Government concerned, or some officer empowered in this behalf by either of the two Governments.

6. Furthermore, the prosecution is bound to establish the forgery and after establishment through cogent evidence, the relevant court will forward the complaint to the concerned SHO for initiation of…

Opening of the judgment. Loading the full judgment on LexPK…