1992 P Cr (PLP)
Before Raja Afrasiab Khan, J Versus Ch. ALI MUHAMMAD and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1992 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Raja Afrasiab Khan, J |
| Parties | Before Raja Afrasiab Khan, J Versus Ch. ALI MUHAMMAD and others‑‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1992 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Raja Afrasiab Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 P Cr (PLP) (Before Raja Afrasiab Khan, J Versus Ch. ALI MUHAMMAD and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Rana M. Sarwar for Petitioners.
- Shaukat Umar Pirzada and Farooq Bedar, Addl. A.‑G. Punjab for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 8th February, 1992.
Headnotes / Summary
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S. 561‑A‑‑‑Quashing of F.I.R.‑‑‑Both parties claming to be owners of house in dispute, had riled civil suits against each other‑‑‑Pending civil suits a criminal case was also registered on statement of respondent against petitioners and challan had been submitted against petitioners for their trial before Criminal Court‑‑‑Petitioners had filed application for quashing of F.I.R. against them on ground that case being of civil nature, police had got no jurisdiction to interfere in the matter‑‑‑Considering fact that controversy over property in question was pending adjudication before competent Civil Court, proceeding before Criminal Court was directed to remain stayed till such time controversy was finally decided by Civil Court and after decision of Civil suits between parties, copies of judgments should be forwarded by Civil Court to Criminal Court to enable it to proceed further according to law. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S. 561‑A‑‑‑Stay of criminal proceedings‑‑‑Where controversy over ownership of property was pending adjudication before competent Civil Court, subsequent proceedings before Criminal Court, regarding same dispute, would remain stayed till such time controversy was finally decided by Civil Court.
Judgment & Decree
(b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S. 561‑A‑‑‑Stay of criminal proceedings‑‑‑Where controversy over ownership of property was pending adjudication before competent Civil Court, subsequent proceedings before Criminal Court, regarding same dispute, would remain stayed till such time controversy was finally decided by Civil Court. Rana M. Sarwar for Petitioners. Shaukat Umar Pirzada and Farooq Bedar, Addl. A.‑G. Punjab for Respondents. Date of hearing: 8th February, 1992. Faqir Muhammad son of Nemat Ali and Azhar Javaid son of Faqir Muhammad, petitioners, claim that they are owners of House NoA/73 Mohallah Malikanwala, Bhakkar City. The stand taken by respondent No.3, Atta Muhammad, is that the petitioners arc not owners of the house in question and in fact he is owner of the said property. He claims that he has inherited the house in question from his ancestors. Petitioners have instituted a civil suit against respondent No.3 before the Civil Court at Bhakkar to claim their ownership of the house in question: Similarly, a civil suit has also been filed by Atta Muhammad, respondent No.3, against the petitioners for cancellation of the sale‑deed in order to establish his ownership vis‑a‑vis House NoA/73. In the meantime a criminal case was also registered on the statement of respondent No.3 against the writ petitioners and that the challan was submitted against the petitioners for their trial before the Criminal Court. This petition has been moved for quashment of F.I.R. No.56, dated 14‑3‑1988 Police I A Station City Bhakkar on the ground that the case is of civil nature and that the police has got no jurisdiction to interfere in the matter.
2. After hearing the learned counsel ‑for the parties and perusing the record, I am of the view that the controversy over the property in question is pending adjudication before the competent Civil Court at Bhakkar. In this view of the matter proceedings before the Criminal Court shall remain stayed fill such time the controversy is finally decided by the learned Civil Judge, Bhakkar. After the decision of the civil suits, copies of the judgments shall be forwarded by the learned Civil Judge to the Criminal Court to enable it to proceed further according to law. The learned Civil Judge Bhakkar before C whom the suits of the parties are pending shall dispose of the same within four months. With this observation, this petition stands disposed of with no order as to costs. H.B.T./F‑19/L Order accordingly.