ORDER SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Crl. Revision Appln. No.S-15 of 2019.

_________________________________________________________________

DATE                   ORDER  WITH  SIGNATURE  OF  HON’BLE  JUDGE

_________________________________________________________________

For hearing of main case.

03.04.2023

                        Mr. Javed Ahmed Soomro, Advocate for the applicant.

                        Mr. Habibullah Ghouri, Advocate for private respondents.

                        Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Addl.P.G for the State.

                        =  *  = * = * = * = * =

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.-    The facts in brief necessary for disposal of instant Crl.Revision Application are that the applicant filed a direct complaint for prosecution of the private respondents under Section 3/4 of Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 for having dispossessed him from his house; such complaint was dismissed in limine by learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Shikarpur, vide order dated 06.03.2019, which is impugned by the applicant before this Court by preferring the instant criminal revision application.

2.         It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the learned trial Court has recorded dismissal of the complaint of the applicant without lawful justification ignoring his dispossession from subject house at the hands of private respondents; therefore, such order is liable to be examined by this Court.

3.         Learned counsel for the private respondents and learned Addl.P.G for the State by supporting the impugned order have sought for dismissal of the instant criminal revision application by contending that the subject house property was jointly purchased by the applicant and the private respondents.

4.         Heard and perused the record.

5.         As per report furnished by SHO, P.S New Foujdari, the property was jointly purchased by the applicant and the private respondents; it was divided by them privately, whereupon they raised their separate houses, which are in their respective possessions; it, however, is entered in revenue record in the name of applicant and no issue of dispossession of the applicant there-from has taken place. The report furnished by the Mukhtiarkar, Taluka Shikarpur is silent with regard to dispossession of the applicant from the subject property. If for the sake of arguments, it is believed that the property was actually purchased by the applicant alone and it was occupied illegally by the private respondents, even then he has a remedy to exhaust by filing a suit for declaration of his title and possession. In these circumstances, learned trial Court was right to record dismissal of direct complaint filed by the applicant in limine by way of impugned order, which is not calling for interference by this Court by way of instant criminal revision application; it is dismissed accordingly.

                 JUDGE