2013 PLP 222 (YLR)
AKBAR ALI — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT POLICE OFFICER and 5 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2013 PLP 222 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Manzoor Ahmad Malik, J |
| Parties | AKBAR ALI — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT POLICE OFFICER and 5 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2013 PLP 222 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2013 PLP 222 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Manzoor Ahmad Malik, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2013 PLP 222 (YLR) (AKBAR ALI — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT POLICE OFFICER and 5 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Imran Muhammad Safdar for Petitioner.
- Ms. Najma Perveen for Respondent No.5.
- Amjad Ali Chattha, Assistant Advocate General with Rafi A.S.-I.
- 3. Learned counsel for respondent No.5 also vehemently opposes this petition.
Headnotes / Summary
Amjad Ali Chattha, Assistant Advocate General with Rafi A.S.-I.
Judgment & Decree
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, J.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of his petition, contends that civil litigation between the parties is pending regarding the same matter before this Court; that the petitioner is admittedly owner of the property; that in view of this situation, even the registration of the F.I.R. is against law and the subsequent proceedings on the basis of the F.I.R. will be sheer abuse of law; that the bare reading of the F.I.R. does not make any offence under section 379, P.P.C. or under any provisions of law because lifting of crop from one's own land is no crime, therefore, the instant F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
2. On the other hand, learned Law Officer under instructions from the police officer present in court and after perusal of the record states that the police, after investigation, has submitted the challan of case F.I.R. No.61 dated 7-4-2010 registered under section 379, P.P.C. at Police Station Mankera, District Bhakkar in the court of competent jurisdiction on 26-4-2010 and now the petitioner has an adequate and efficacious remedy of filing an application before the learned trial Court under the relevant provisions of law.
3. Learned counsel for respondent No.5 also vehemently opposes this petition.
4. I have heard the arguments of both the sides.
5. The challan has been submitted in the court of competent jurisdiction. A factual controversy is involved between the parties. This petition is, therefore, disposed of with the observation that the petitioner is at liberty to file an application before the learned trial Court where the challan is pending. The petitioner may take all the grounds which have been agitated before this Court and if any such application is filed, the same shall be decided expedi-tiously purely on merits and strictly in accordance with law after taking into consideration all the grounds which the petitioner may take in support of his version. KMZ/A-88/L Order accordingly.