1992 P Cr (PLP)

‑‑‑‑Ss. 87, 88 & 561‑A‑‑‑Attachment of property‑‑‑Objection against attachment of property of a proclaimed offender can be entertained and adjudicated upon if any person claims any right in that property as against the proclaimed offender and if such objection prevails with the Magistrate and order of attachment is withdrawn, no other person has got any right to challenge that order by way of a revision petition‑‑‑Order of Magistrate withdrawing the order of attachment after accepting the objection of the respondent and order of Sessions Court dismissing the revision petition of the complainant against the said order of the Magistrate, held, would not suffer from any illegality or irregularity and would not cause any miscarriage justice‑‑‑Petition was consequently dismissed. Abdur Rauf Rohilla for Petitioner. Miss Musarat Hilali for Respondents. Date of hearing: 28th September, 1991 One Abdul Qasim, husband of Mst. Zohra, respondent No.l alongwith other co‑accused was charged under section 302/307/34, P.P.C. it F.I.R. No.143 recorded in Police Station, Batagram on 27‑7‑1987. He absconded and proceedings under section 87, Cr.P.C. were initiated against him to declare him a proclaimed offender and after completion of the same, his agricultural property in village Dolat Pura was attached under section 88, Cr.P.C. However, Mst. Zohra, respondent No.l, filed an objection against the said order of attachment to the effect that the property had been gifted to her by her husband. The objection was accepted by the learned Illaqa Magistrate and the order of attachment was withdrawn on 14‑4‑1990. Syed Zakaullah Shah, petitioner herein, who is complainant of the F.I.R., filed a revision petition in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Charsadda, challenging the aforesaid order of withdrawal of attachment, but the same was dismissed. Still feeling aggrieved, the petitioner came up to this Court with a writ petition which was subsequently converted into a petition under section 561‑A, Cr.P.C.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length. A minute perusal of the provisions of sections 87 and 88, Cr.P.C. will clearly indicate that an objection against the attachment of property of a proclaimed offender can be entertained and adjudicated upon if any person claims any right in that property as against the proclaimed offender and if such objection prevails with the Magistrate and order of attachment is withdrawn, no other person has got any right to challenge that order by way of a revision petition.

3. As such, both the impugned orders of the learned Magistrate and learned Additional Sessions Judge do not suffer from any illegality or irregularity or have caused any miscarriage of justice. There is no force in this petition, which is dismissed. N.H.Q./1297/P Petition dismissed.