2013 PLP 2636 (YLR)

MUNIR AHMED CHAUDHARY, J.

This application under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. was filed by the petitioner/accused for quashment of F.I.R. No.48 of 2012 dated 27-4-2012 registered against him under sections 418, 420 and 34, APC at Police Station Sehnsa District Kotli.

2. It has been stated in the application that the F.I.R. does not depict the commission of offences and is liable to be quashed. The facts mentioned in the report constitute civil liability on the part of the petitioner and no criminal liability can be attributed. The respondent Muhammad Arshad/complainant himself violated the terms and conditions of compromise between the parties. The petitioner has got no concern with the suit mentioned in the report. It was prayed to quash the above mentioned F.I.R.

3. Objections / comments were submitted stating therein that a case was registered against the petitioner on application of the respondent/ complainant under sections 418, 420 and 34 APC. The case was registered in accordance with the facts of the occurrence. The petitioner violated the terms and conditions of compromise between the parties. The investigation has been completed and only report under section 173 of Cr.P.C. has to be filed before the competent Court. It was prayed to dismiss the petition/application under section 561-A, Cr.P.C.

4. Arguments were advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. Raja Muhammad Sagheer Khan, Advocate, the learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner has got no concern with the suit filed against the complainant, so, he did not violate the terms and conditions of the compromise between him and the complainant. The petitioner committed no offence as mentioned in the case. The facts mentioned in the report do not constitute the offences mentioned in the report. Mere breach of a contract or compromise cannot give rise to a criminal prosecution. The proceedings initiated against the petitioner are abuse of process of law, which are liable to be quashed. The learned counsel requested to accept the instant petition and to quash the F.I.R. lodged against the petitioner and referred the following precedents in support of his arguments:- (1) PLD 1994 Peshawar 121, (2) 1991 PCr.LJ 963, (3) 1995 PCr.LJ 980 and (4) 2000 PCr.LJ 1734.

5. While controverting the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Rafiullah Sultani, Advocate, the learned counsel for private respondent contended that criminal and civil proceedings can be proceeded side by side. The petitioner has violated the terms and conditions of compromise and a criminal case has been registered against him. The petitioner has got an alternate remedy under section 249-A of Cr.P.C. before the trial Court, so, the present petition under section 561-A Cr.P.C. is not maintainable. High Court cannot interfere in the investigation process. Inherent powers of the High Court under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. are not supposed to be exercised to override the expressed provisions of law. The learned counsel requested to dismiss the petition under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. and referred the following precedents in support of his arguments:-- (1) PLD 1986 FSC 10 (2) 2009 YLR 438 (3) 2009 YLR 1004

6. The learned Additional Advocate-General owned the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for private respondent and requested to dismiss the present petition.

7. After hearing the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, I have gone through the record and the precedents referred minutely. The record reveals that the petitioner/accused and the respondent/complainant had civil litigation between them and ultimately they arrived at a compromise. It was undertaken by the petitioner/accused that he will not approach any Court regarding the disputed controversy between the parties. Later on, a suit was filed by mother of the petitioner/accused against the respondent/ complainant. An application was moved by the respondent/complainant, Muhammad Arshad against the petitioner/accused at Police Station Sehnsa to register a criminal case against the petitioner/accused. As a result, the criminal case was registered against the petitioner and investigation of the case was completed. The investigating agency has taken this version that the petitioner has committee the offences mentioned in the F.I.R. and the report under section 11 of Cr.P.C. has to be submitted before the competent Court.

8. The main point to be resolved is whether the instant petition under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. is maintainable having in view the circumstances of the present case or not? It is an admitted principle of law that when an alternate remedy is available, then inherent powers of this Court under section 561-A Cr.P.C. should not be exercised. The offences mentioned in the F.I.R. are triable by a Magistrate First Class and the petitioner/ accused has got a remedy to apply to the competent Magistrate under section 249-A, Cr.P.C. Although, High Court has got inherent powers under section 561-A Cr.P.C., but it will be a direct interference in domain of prosecution agency and the relevant Magistrate. This principle has been laid down in the precedents 2009 YLR 1004 and 2009 YLR

438. It has also been held in the precedent PLD 1986 FSC 10 that criminal and civil Courts can proceed the matters side by side and they are required to decide the case before the Court in accordance with evidence produced by the parties before it without being influenced by any finding of a fact given by other Court. The facts of the precedents referred by the learned counsel for the petitioner have no conformity with the facts of the present case. In the light of what has been stated above, it is not just and proper to interfere in the domain of investigating agency and the relevant competent Magistrate having in view the circumstances of the present case. The petitioner/accused has got an alternate remedy to approach the competent court after submission of report of the case under section 173 of Cr.P.C. The application/ petition under hand stands dismissed with no order as to costs. HBT/80/AJ&K Application dismissed.