IN THE HIGH COURT
OF SINDH, AT KARACHI
Criminal Revision Application No. 196 of 2022
Applicant: Muhammad
Aslam through Mr. Kaleem Ali advocate
Respondents 1&2: Haroon
and Suleman through Mr. Irfan Ali advocate
The State: Through
Mr. Abrar Ali Khichi, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh
Date of hearing: 06.06.2023
Date of judgment: 06.06.2023
J U D G M E N T
IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is the case of the applicant that the
subject property was leased out to him in the year 1986, the portion whereof
has illegally been occupied by the private respondents by dispossessing him
therefrom. By maintaining such fact, he filed a direct complaint for
prosecution of the private respondents for having committed an offence
punishable under Section 3/4 of Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005, it was
dismissed by learned VI-Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi South vide order
dated 07.07.2022, which is impugned by the applicant before this Court by
preferring the instant Criminal Revision Application.
It is contended by learned counsel for
the applicant that learned trial Court has passed the impugned order in
slipshod manner without appreciating the real facts of the case by making an
observation that there is dispute between the parties over civil side, therefore
such order being illegal is liable to be set aside.
Learned Addl. P.G for the state and
learned counsel for the private respondents by supporting the impugned order
has sought for dismissal of the instant Revision Application by contending that
no offence as alleged by the applicant has taken place and he is intending to
deprive his brothers from their legitimate right of inheritance over the
subject property by involving them in criminal litigations. In support of their
contention, they relied upon case of Habibullah
and others vs. Abdul Manan and others (2012 SCMR 1533).
Heard arguments and perused the
record.
The applicant and private respondents
are brothers inter-se. As per the private respondents, the subject property
being part of katchi abadi was owned/occupied
by their father and after his death it was regularized and the applicant being
elder of the family by taking advantage of them being minors got it leased out
in his favour in a deceitful manner, they are in possession of the portion whereof
since long and no dispossession of the applicant therefrom has taken place.
Admittedly, a civil suit for declaration of their title with consequential
relief has also been filed by the private respondents, which is pending
adjudication before the civil court having jurisdiction. Nothing has been
brought on record, which may suggest that the private respondents are land
grabbers or members of land mafia. In these premises, learned trial Court was
right to dismiss the direct complaint of the applicant by way of impugned
order, it is not calling for any interference by this Court by way of instant
Criminal Revision Application, it is dismissed accordingly.
JUDGE