-S. 22-A--Dishonestly issuing of cheque--Repayment of loan--Dishonouring of cheque--Issuance of cheque as security--Misusing of cheque-

 PLJ 2023 Lahore (Note) 49

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

----S. 22-A--Dishonestly issuing of cheque--Repayment of loan--Dishonouring of cheque--Issuance of cheque as security--Misusing of cheque--Petition for registration of criminal case was accepted--Challenge to--Petitioner’s claim of cheque being lying as s security and after repayment of loan, cheque was misused does not sound good for reason that no receipt of repayment was placed on record--There being nothing on contrary, no illegality has been committed by Ex-officio Justice of Peace by passing impugned order--Petition dismissed.      [Para 2] A

PLJ 2021 Lahore 98 and PLJ 2021 Lahore 43 ref.

M/s. Muhammad Zubair Yousaf and Tazeem Ahmad Bajwa, Advocate for Petitioner.

Haji Dilbar Khan Mahar, Assistant Advocate General.

Mr. Ghulam Shabir Dhakoo, Advocate for Complainant.

Date of hearing: 15.9.2022.

 PLJ 2023 Lahore (Note) 49
[Multan Bench, Multan]
Present: Muhammad Amjad Rafiq, J.
MUHAMMAD RIAZ--Petitioner
versus
EX-OFFICIO JUSTICE OF PEACE TEHSIL JAHANIAN DISTT. KHANEWAL etc.--Respondents
W.P. No. 7891 of 2021, decided on 15.9.2022.

Order

Briefly the facts of the case are that Respondent No. 3 namely Ghulam Muhammad, Regional Recovery Head Manager Saim, Multan Region Area, Khanewal, NRSP (National Rural Support Program) filed an application under Section 22-A, Cr.P.C., to seek a direction for registration of criminal case against the petitioner with the allegation of dishonestly issuing cheque, pleading that the same had been issued towards repayment of loan, but when presented in bank, the same was dishonored, whereupon, vide order dated 24.05.2021 the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-officio Justice of Peace, directed the complainant to approach the respondent/SHO for registration of FIR and the SHO was directed to proceed further in accordance with law.

2. The legal proposition involved here in this case is “Whether Microfinance Institutions can be termed as financial institution within the contemplation of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, so as to say that its matter could only be tried by the Banking Court, excluding the applicability of Code of Criminal Procedure?” This question of law came under deliberation before this Court in number of cases and the above legal position has been repeatedly settled. In this context reference be made to the case “Muhammad Mumtaz Akhtar versus Additional Sessions Judge, etc.” (PLJ 2021 Lahore 98), wherein, after thorough discussion with reference to relevant statues and the case law, this case held that:

“……microfinance institutions cannot be termed as financial institution within the contemplation of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, to say that its matter could only be tried by the Banking Court. Thus, Code of Criminal Procedure being fully applicable, the application filed under Section 22-A/22-B, Cr.P.C. on behalf of the microfinance institution was fully competent………...”

The case “NRSP Microfinance Bank Limited versus The Additional Sessions Judge/Justice of Peace and 3 others” (PLJ 2021 Lahore 43 (Bahawalpur Bench) and an unreported order dated 13.11.2018 passed in the case “NRSP Microfinance Bank -Limited versus Additional Sessions Judge, etc” (Writ Petition No. 7950/2018-BWP), are to the same effect. In the circumstances petitioner’s claim of cheque being lying as s security and after repayment of loan, said cheque was misused, does not sound good for the reason that no receipt of repayment was placed on record. There being nothing on the contrary, no illegality has been committed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-officio Justice of Peace by passing the impugned order. This writ petition, therefore, are dismissed.

(Y.A.)  Petition dismissed