INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PAKISTAN versus ABDUL LATIF CHANNA
Appeal against the bad application filed by three respondents under section 265 of section 265 and Section 265 of the Banking Companies (Debt, Progress, Recovery of Credit and Finance) Act (XV of 1997), Section 19 The permission was granted by the banking court's charge for acquittal. The defendant was that the machinery / plant for which the loan was provided was missing and the mortgaged property was leased to someone else. A bank lawyer was ordered by the bank to remove the allegations of abuse and remove the machinery / plant, claiming that it was a recognized position that three Associated debt was secured by the voters, and they are responsible for a criminal offense. Under the law, ineligibility to receive and repay a loan was not a criminal offense. Procedure in the civil forum provided under the law, but the default commission on repayment of debt will not give rise to any criminal offense to machinery / PL. The NT was removed, in which it was alleged against one of the respondents only that criminal proceedings against the respondents would be continued, though no useful motive would have been achieved if the remaining respondents were prosecuted. ? Since there was no possibility of his punishment in the circumstances of the case
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2012
