JAVED IQBAL versus CRESCENT COMMERCIAL BANK LTD. ISLAMABAD THROUGH MANAGER
Sections 3 523 and 505050 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 On the suspicion of confiscation of property by the police on the seizure of such property car was neither charged nor suspected in this case. Existence exists There may be doubts in this case about the carriage caused by the terms and conditions of the lease purchase agreement between the hungry civil dispute buyer / applicant and the leasing bank / defendant. That is, until there was no opportunity for Section H to seize the vehicle. Their resolution of this dispute, disregarding the mandate of section 505050, seized the vehicle, enabling the CCP to conduct a judicial inquiry under the High Court's constitutional jurisdiction under Section 232323, Cr. Structured approach. The PC, Section HO, had the responsibility of reporting the vehicle to the area magistrate for a moment so that the magistrate could make a reasonable order regarding the car's disposal or delivery of the seized vehicle to the person. The magistrate entitled to his possession was legally obliged to revoke the proceedings by Section H. Section 5050 & 3 523, CRPC and the return of the car to its buyer from whose possession it was apprehended by the Department of H.A. The arbitrary, inaccurate, principles laid down on the subject of confiscation of property transferred by the police. Unlawful orders to be illegal and offensive cannot be allowed to stop the settlement, the High Court directed the local police to hand over the vehicle to the buyer / applicant.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009
