2002 PLP 1895 (MLD)

Ch. Abdus Saleem for Petitioners. Dr. Asghar Ahmad Rana for Respondent No

13. Zahid Farani Sheikh, A.A.‑G. for the State. Through this Constitutional petition, the prayer is that F.I.R. No.242, dated 22‑7‑2001 registered at Police Station Sadar, Gojra against the petitioners under sections 440/447/148/149, P.P.C. may be quashed. Brief facts of the case are that Muhammad Amjad has got registered the abovesaid F.I.R. alleging therein that the petitioners alongwith others on the night between 18/19‑7‑2001 while armed with tire‑arms had tried to take the possession of the land in Khasra No.44, Killa No.3 min 4, 5, 6, 15, measuring 72 Kanals, 9 Marlas as he was in possession of the same for the last so many years and has purchased to same from Mushtaq Ahmad. The possession has been handed over to him. Muhammad Aslam petitioner etc. has also filed a civil suit and has obtained a stay order. It is also alleged that the accused has taken the possession and also damaged the crops of the petitioner valuing lacs of rupees.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that admittedly the petitioners earlier filed a civil suit in which the petitioners have claimed that they are in possession of the disputed land which has been purchased by them through an agreement to sell and suit for specific performance of the contract has been filed. It is also contended that the interim stay/status quo order has been passed by the learned Civil Court admittedly before the registration of the case. Mushtaq Ahmad appeared in the Court and made a statement on the basis of which the learned Civil Judge directed the petitioners to deposit the remaining amount which has been deposited. Hence the petitioners have paid the entire amount before the Court and the possession was given to the petitioners, after the payment of the total amount. Muhammad Amjad has been impleaded as a party who after one year after the filing of the civil suit got lodged the F.I.R. with mala fide intention and ulterior motive in order to pressurize the petitioners not to pursue the civil suit pending before the competent Court of jurisdiction.

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the grant of petition on the ground that the civil and criminal litigation can go side by side and there is no ground for the quashment of the criminal F.I.R. because petitioners are guilty of an offence which is made out from the bare perusal of the contents of the F. I. R. It has been further contended that the pendency of the civil suit is not a bar for the registration of the case and proceedings cannot be stayed.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record myself. Admittedly, the petitioners about the same disputed land had filed a civil suit for specific performance which was pending in the Court of law. Mushtaq Ahmad vendor made a statement and the remaining amount was paid by the petitioners who had been handed over the possession and the status quo order has also been issued by the Civil Court. The dispute whether the petitioners are in possession of the land is yet to be decided by a Civil Court after recording the evidence of both the parties. Until this question is settled; who was in possession, it cannot be said that the respondent No.3 got lodged an F.I.R. with bona fide intention. On the other hand, the claim of the petitioners is that they 8 are in possession of the land while they have earlier filed a civil suit and had alleged the same. On the other hand, the complainant Amjad claimed that crops have been damaged valuing lacs of rupees which is subjudice before the Court of competent jurisdiction. The arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners cannot be brushed aside that the registration of the F.I.R. prima facie is in order to pressurize the petitioners to come to an agreement with the complainant. The pendency of the investigation in the said F.I.R. in such‑like circumstances will definitely put pressure on the petitioners to agree upon the terms and conditions of the complainant. Hence it will be in the interest of justice if investigation in F.I.R. is stayed till the final disposal of the civil suit pending between the parties. Hence this writ petition is accepted and investigation is stated till the final disposal of the civil suit between the parties. H.B.T./M‑1274/L Petition accepted.