2012 PLP 1040 (MLD)

SALMAN HAMID, J.

Through this application under section 561-A Criminal Procedure Code, Haji Muhammad Iqbal, (Applicant) has challenged the order dated 17-2-2011 (Impugned Order) passed by V-Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, Karachi, South, (V-JM) in Case/F.I.R. No.7 of 2011 under sections 420, 468, 471, 147 Pakistan Penal Code of Police Station City Court wherein it was alleged by the applicant that the accused mentioned therein who were 11 in number names of whom are Mian Abid Manzoor, Saad Abid, Salahuddin, Zahid Hussain and his wife, Tabbish, Jahanzaib, Zeeshan, Muhammad Abbas and his wife, Muhammad Arif Mehandi and his wife, Nadeem Ahmed and his wife, Kashif Rafiq and his wife, after making false sale agreement in respect of property No.Z-C-10, Gulshan-e-Zahoor, Lines Area, Jamshed Town, Karachi, entered into various tenancy agreements in respect thereof and derived benefits therefrom. The case was investigated into by SIP Muhammad Aslam who submitted his report wherein it was mentioned that the Accused No.1 namely Mian Abid Manzoor son of Mian Manzoor Hussain had been acquitted from Crime No.64 of 2009 which was lodged by the same applicant against him in respect of the same sale agreement and that the applicant had also filed yet another F.I.R. No.89 of 2010 against same Mian Manzoor and his son Saad Abid and others which too was disposed of in 'B' class. Upon query of this court by the applicant as to whether such acquittal order and the order passed declaring F.I.R. No.89 of 2010 in 'B' Class had been challenged, the answer was in negative. It has also transpired from the Impugned Order that yet another case under the provisions of Illegal Dispossession Act was filed by one Sohail Hussain on behalf of the applicant as his attorney against Mian Abid Manzoor and others which too was dismissed, appeal against which was filed before this court in which order was passed and the case was remanded back to the trial court. On the other hand, learned counsel for Mian Abid Manzoor and others has denied all the allegations and it was refuted that the case that was dismissed under the provisions of Illegal Dispossession Act upon appeal was remanded as according to him no appeal was filed there against. It was also mentioned by the learned counsel that Mian Abid Manzoor is occupying the above building in his capacity as an owner and that the suits are pending before this court in respect thereof. Learned Addl. P.G. appearing for the State also opposed the application and adopted the arguments of the learned counsel for Mian Abid Manzoor and others but added that according to him the application amounts to double jeopardy inasmuch as that the allegations those were raised in F.I.R. No.64 of 2009 and 89 of 2010 had been finally adjudicated upon in respect of the same allegations contained in F.I.R. No.7 of 2011. I have heard the applicant who is appearing in person and the learned Addl.P.G. so also counsel for Mian Abid Manzoor and others. Bare perusal of the Impugned Order would show that the V-JM after looking into the above aspect of the matter came to the conclusion that dual trial is against the wisdom of law and therefore the learned V-JM having discussed that the case under the provisions of Illegal Dispossession Act having been dismissed and in F.I.R. No.64 of 2009 the accused had been acquitted so also in F.I.R. No.89 of 2010 the position was the same, by way of summary order the report of the SSP Investigation under section 173, Cr.P.C. was approved and was disposed of under 'B' class. Above being the position, the Impugned Order does not require any interference of this court and therefore the application is dismissed in limine. M.W.A./M-35/K Application dismissed.