IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, AT KARACHI

Criminal Appeal No. 429 of 2019

Appellant: Babar through M/s R. Masood Ahmed Qazi and Bashir Ahmed Buledi advocates

Respondent No.1: Through Mr. Naeemullah Bhutto advocate

The State: Through Mr. Khadim Hussain, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh

Date of hearing: 15.09.2022

Date of judgment: 15.09.2022

J U D G M E N T

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J- It is the case of appellant that his late uncle Muhammad Yousuf being transgender was having a subject house at Karachi, which on his death was to be inherited by him and his sister Mst. Rani; it was occupied by the private respondents, under these circumstances, he filed a direct complaint for prosecution of the private respondents for having committed offence punishable under Section 3/4 of the Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005, it was dismissed by learned VII-Additional Sessions Judge Karachi South vide order dated 27.06.2019, which is impugned by the appellant before this Court by preferring the instant appeal.

It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that learned trial Court has dismissed the direct complaint of the appellant in slipshod manner, without considering the material brought on record, therefore, impugned order being illegal is liable to be set aside with direction to learned trial Court to take cognizance of the offence and to proceed with the case in accordance with law.

Learned Addl. P.G for the state and learned counsel for the private respondents by supporting the impugned order has sought for dismissal of instant appeal by contending that the civil litigation between the parties over the subject house is going on.

Heard arguments and perused the record.

Admittedly the subject house was owned and possessed by Muhammad Yousuf, who is claimed by the appellant to be his uncle; the record of right whereof has not yet been mutated in favour of the appellant or his sister Mst. Rani. The private respondents are claiming to be in possession of the subject house having purchased the same from Mohammad Yusuf under agreement of sale; such agreement has not yet been challenged to be false or otherwise by the appellant or his sister Mst. Rani. The police report also favours the private respondents. A civil suit filed by the private respondents even prior to the filing of subject direct complaint for specific performance of contract is also pending adjudication before the Civil Court having jurisdiction. In these circumstances, learned trial Court was right to dismiss the direct complaint of the appellant by way of impugned order advising him to have his remedy through civil Court having jurisdiction, such order is not calling for interference by this Court by way of instant appeal. It is dismissed accordingly.

JUDGE