IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Criminal Appeal No.S-46 of 2017

Appellants                          :  1). Bashir Ahmed s/o Sher Muhammad

                                                2). Muhammad Yousif s/o Ali Bux

                                                3). Imamuddin s/o Rahimdad Shar

                                                4). Chanhi s/o Ali Beg,

                                                5). Ghulam Shabir s/o Guhram

Through Mr. Asif Ali Abdul Razzak Soomro,

Advocate

Respondents                       :   Complainant Momin Hakro through

Mr.Sarfraz Ali Abbasi, Advocate

The State through Mr. Sharafuddin Kanhar,

A.P.G  

Date of hearing                   :     10.12.2018                 

Date of decision                  :     10.12.2018                           

J U D G M E N T

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J-.The appellants by way of instant criminal appeal have impugned judgment dated 25.05.2017, passed by learned 3^rd Additional Sessions Judge, Shikarpur, whereby they have been convicted and sentenced as under;

“I am of the view that charge has been proved against accused persons beyond all reasonable doubts, hence I hereby convict the accused persons u/s 9 Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005, r/w Section 265-H (2) Cr.PC and sentence each of the accused for contravening the provision of Section 3 for the period of five years and fine of Rs.25000/- each, in failure to pay the fine the accused persons will suffer six months more simple imprisonment. The accused persons are also imposed compensation of Rs.50,000/- each”.

2.                 It is alleged that the appellants have illegally dispossessed the private respondent/complainant of his landed property consisting of Survey No.536, area (05-35) Acres, situated in Deh Mehmood Abad, Taluka Khanpur, for that the private respondent/complainant filed a direct complaint under the provision of Illegal Dispossession Act against the appellants, it was brought on record by learned trial Court, after usual enquiry.  

3.                At trial, the appellants denied the charge and private respondent/complainant in order to prove the same, examined himself, produced Village Form-VII, copy of decree and memo of complaint and then examined PWs Muhammad Umer and Salahuddin and then closed the side.    

4.                The appellants in their statements recorded u/s 342 Cr.PC denied the allegations leveled against them by private respondent/complainant by pleading innocence. They did not examine any one in their defence or themselves on oath in disproof of the allegations leveled against them by the private respondent/complainant.  

5.                On evaluation of evidence, so produced by the private respondent/complainant, the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellants by way of impugned judgment, as stated above.

6.                It is contended by learned counsel of the appellants that the appellants have been convicted and sentenced by learned trial Court without lawful justification and on the basis of improper assessment of the evidence ignoring the facts that the parties were litigating with each other since long on civil side over the disputed land. By contending so, he sought for acquittal of the appellants.   

7.                Learned A.P.G for the State and learned counsel for the private respondent/complainant recorded no objection to acquittal of the appellants by contending that the grievance of private respondent/complainant has been resolved.

8.                I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

9.                The complaint was brought on record on the basis of enquiry reports which were furnished by SHO P.S Khanpur and Mukhtiarkar (Revenue), Taluka Khanpur. None of them has been examined by the private respondent/complainant at trial, to prove their reports, which appears to be significant. Both the parties have been litigating with each other on civil side since long; such litigation between them ought not to have been lost sight of by learned trial Court. The private respondent/complainant now has recorded no objection for acquittal of the appellants by filing his affidavit by stating therein that his grievance has been resolved. In these circumstances, the conviction and sentence recorded against the appellants by way of impugned judgment could not be sustained, it is set-aside. Consequently, the appellants are acquitted of the charge.

10.              The instant criminal appeal stands disposed off accordingly.

                                                                                                    JUDGE

--