HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Appeal No.878 2019

Appellant              :         Muhammad Sharif Sajid son of Khushi

Muhammad, throughM/s.JafferRaza,

YahyaIqbal and AsadIftikhar, Advocates.

Respondent No.1  :         Special Court (Commercial) for Sindh &

Baluchistan at Karachi.

Respondent No.2  :         Trade Development Authority of Pakistan

through   Syed   Abrar   Ahmed  Bukhari,

Advocate.

Respondent No.3  :         Quivera Marketing LLC, through Mr. Saadat

Yar Khan, Advocate.

Respondent No.4. :         Trust House, through Mr. Ashraf Yar Khan

Advocate.

Respondent No.5  :         The State through Mr. Muhammad Ahmed,

Assistant Attorney General.

Date of hearing     :        11.12.2020

Date of Judgment :        14.12.2020

J U D G M E N T

Abdul MaalikGaddi, J.–Through this criminal appeal, the appellant has challenged the Judgment dated 17.07.2012in Case No.01 of 2010, and Orders dated20.11.2019and 12.12.2019 passed by the Special Court (Commercial) for Sindh and Baluchistan at Karachi and has submitted that the said judgment and orders suffer from material deficiencies and procedural errors and are liable to be set-aside; that the entire proceedings in the said case since inception are fraudulent and have been initiated by someone who is/was not lawful attorney; that the respondent No.3 is an impostor and has only initiated the proceedings to benefit from the dissolvent  of respondent No.3 and to usurp money and further submitted that because of act like these that Pakistan is on the grey list of FATF list and to curb the same, the intervention of this Court is sought; that the Special Prosecutor of Commercial has also highlighted the chances of money laundering in the instant case and has prayed for judicial notice of the same; that respondent No.3 has been long dissolved which makes the entire proceedings a nullity in the eyes of law and he submitted that such fraudulent proceedings are in violation of Article 10A of the Constitution which guarantees a right to a fair trial. During the course of arguments, learned Counsel for the appellant has referred number of documents on record and submitted that on the basis of these documents, it appears that fraud has been committed, but these facts were not brought into the notice of trial Courts.

2.       Facts of the case needs not be reiterated here as the same have already been elaborately mentioned in the memo of appeal as well as in the impugned judgment and orders.

3.       On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondents No.2 to 4 have vehemently opposed this appeal and submitted that the controversy agitated in this appeal has already been decided upto the level of Hon’ble Supreme Court and the appellant while suppressing the material facts has succeeded in obtaining the order dated 18.12.2019 which is liable to be recalled and this appeal may be dismissed along with compensatory costs.

4.       I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties at a considerable length and have perused the documents, judgment and orders passed by the trial Courtsin this matter and come to the conclusion that this appeal is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed for the reasons that accused/appellant Muhammad Sharif Sajidhas exported rejected garments to the respondent No.3 and on examination of goods the same were found to be defective and consequently rejected by the buyer/respondent No.3. As such, buyer/respondent No.3 through Michel Painter lodged a complaint to respondent No.2, who filed Case No.1 of 2010 before the respondent No.1 for recovery of money which was disposed of in the following termsvide order dated 17.07.2012.

“Hence, accused Sharif Sajid is made liable to pay US$ 61,094/- into two equal installments depositingbefore this Court at the prevailing rate of SBP 1^st installment within 20 days and second installments on 07^th September, 2012. In case if accused failed to comply this order he will be liable for the attachment of his property. The accused is on Surety. The surety will be discharged and stand cancelled after the full and final payment.”

5.       It is noted that the said judgment was assailed through Criminal Appeal No.231 of 2012 before this Court by the appellant which too was dismissed vide detailed Judgment dated 19.04.2017. Against the said judgment the present appellant preferred Criminal Petition No.60-K of 2017 along with Criminal Miscellaneous Application 69-K of 2017 the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan which were also dismissed on 02.04.2018.

6.       It is also noted that after having exhausted all the available remedies up to the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the appellant vanished and disappeared until the respondent No.2 filed an application before respondent No.1, being the trial Court for implementation of its judgment dated 17.07.2012 for realization of US$ 61,094/- along with accrued markup. The trial Court vide order dated 02.12.2019 was pleased to dispose of the said application with direction to the appellant to pay off the claim amount along with markup, but as per record, it reveals that once again the appellant attempted to hood wink by presenting a pay order of Pakistani Currency of Rs.61,094/- which was returned back to the appellant on 20.11.2019 and directed to submit U.S. Dollar in compliance of the trial Court. It also appears from the record that appellant instead of complying with order of the trial Court dated 12.12.2020, he instead of honoring personal commitment and undertaking to trial Court, appellant with a view to open up a fresh ground of litigation up to Hon’ble Supreme Court filed this criminal appeal, which in the present circumstances of the case, as stated above, appears to be totally misconceived. No cogent ground appears/agitated by the appellant for interference by this Court in the impugned judgment and orders passed by the trial Court, therefore, this criminal appealis hereby dismissed along with listed application.

                             JUDGE

Faizan A. Rathore/PA*