MLD 2006

2006 PLP 491 (MLD)

Haji MUHAMMAD ASHIQ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
their own merits and evidence recorded in one case could not be used in the other---Both the proceedings were governed by different laws---Judgment in the civil case would not be binding in the criminal case---No invariable rule existed that the proceedings in a criminal case should be stayed pending civil litigation, as it was a matter of pure discretion---No irregularity much less any illegality was pointed out in the impugned orders passed by the Courts below warranting interference by High Court in its constitutional jurisdiction---Petition was dismissed in linine accordingly
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2006 PLP 491 (MLD)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties Haji MUHAMMAD ASHIQ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents
Primary Law Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 491 (MLD)?

This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 491 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 491 (MLD) (Haji MUHAMMAD ASHIQ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Representation

  • Pir. S.A. Rashid for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

Ss.420/468/471

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199

Constitutional petition

Stay of criminal proceedings till the pending of civil suit

No law could mandate a Criminal Court to stay criminal , proceedings till decision of the civil suit relating to the same subject-matter

Civil suit and the criminal case both had to be decided on their own merits and evidence recorded in one case could not be used in the other

Both the proceedings were governed by different laws

Judgment in the civil case would not be binding in the criminal case

No invariable rule existed that the proceedings in a criminal case should be stayed pending civil litigation, as it was a matter of pure discretion

No irregularity much less any illegality was pointed out in the impugned orders passed by the Courts below warranting interference by High Court in its constitutional jurisdiction

Petition was dismissed in linine accordingly.

Judgment & Decree

M. BILAL KHAN, J.

Haji Muhammad Ashiq son of Mian Meraj Din, the petitioner by filing this constitutional petition, seeks setting aside of the orders dated 30-7-2005 and 24-10-2005 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class and learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore, respectively. He has further prayed that "a direction be issued to the learned Magistrate Mr. Zia Tariq Khokhar, to complete the trial proceedings but should not announce the final judgment till the pendency of the civil suits for specific performance between the parties pending in the Court of Mr. Shahzad Masood Sadiq, Civil Judge, Lahore and application under section 12(2), C.P.C. also pending in the same Court".

2. Briefly the facts giving rise to this petition were that Dr. Shahid Aziz (respondent No.2) got registered case F.I.R. No.53, dated 3-4-2004, at Police Station "Shadman Colony, Lahore for offence under sections 420, 468, 471, P.P.C., alleging therein that the petitioner had played a fraud with him while selling Property No.714-B, Shadman Colony, Lahore. During the course of trial, the petitioner moved an application before the learned trial Magistrate seeking stay of proceedings of the aforesaid case till the decision of the civil suit for Specific performance and an application under section 12(2), C.P.C. pending in the Court of Mr. Shahzada Maqsood Sadiq, Civil Judge, Lahore. The said application had been dismissed by the learned trial Magistrate vide order dated 30-7-2005. Being aggrieved thereof, the petitioner preferred a revision petition before the learned Court of Sessions, which too met the same fate vide order dated 24-10-2005 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore. Hence, the instant constitutional petition.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at considerable length and have also gone through the impugned orders.

4. There is no provision of law, which mandates a criminal Court to stay, criminal proceedings till decision of civil suit relating to the same subject-matter. Civil suit and criminal case both have to be decided on A their own merits and evidence recorded in one case cannot be used in the other. Likewise the judgment in the civil case would not be binding in the criminal case. Both the proceedings are governed by different laws. It would be useful to quote the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Muhammad Akbar v. The State and others (PLD 1968 SC 281), wherein the Hon'ble apex Court had held that there was no invariable rule that the proceedings in a criminal case should be stayed pending civil litigation. It was held that it was a matter of pure discretion. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point out any irregularity much less any illegality in the impugned orders passed by the learned Courts below warranting interference by this Court in its constitutional jurisdiction. There is no merit in .this petition, which is dismissed in limine. N.H.Q./M-31/L?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition dismissed.