2021 P Cr. L J 1476
[Balochistan]
Before Abdullah Baloch, J
MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM ---Petitioner
Versus
MERA JAN and 3 others ---Respondents
Criminal Revision No. 29 of 2017, decided on 10th March, 2020.
Illegal Dispossession Act (XI of 2005) ---
----Ss. 3, 4 & 5---Prevention of illegal possession of property--- Cognizance of offence---
Investigation and procedure ---Scope ---Petitioner filed a complaint under Ss. 3, 4 & 5 of
Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005, with the claim that the respondent along with his
companion s, in his absence, broke the locks of his house and illegally occupied the same ---
Report of Station House Officer (SHO) of Police Station revealed that house in question was in possession of another person who had further rented it out to another ---Trial C ourt
dismissed the complaint on the ground that the matter pertained to civil dispute ---Validity ---
Petitioner had failed to make the said two persons as party in his complaint ---Matter
pertained to factual controversy which could be resolved after thorough inquiry and
recording of evidence in a civil court ---Revision petition was dismissed, in circumstances.
Secretary to the Government of Punjab v. Ghulam Nabi PLD 2001 SC 415 rel.
Syed Ikhlaq Ahmed Shah for Petitioner.
Respondent No. 1 present in person.
Lakhmi Chand Khurana for Respondent No. 2.
Abdul Kareem Mulghani, State Counsel for the State.
Date of hearing: 4th March, 2020.
JUDGMENT
ABDULLAH BALOCH, J. ---This Criminal Revision Petition is directed against the
order dated 11th February, 2017 (he reinafter referred as "the impugned order") passed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge -I, Quetta (hereinafter referred as "the trial Court")
whereby the complaint under sections 3, 4, 5 of Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 filed by the petitioner was di smissed.
2. Brief facts arising from the instant petition are that the petitioner filed a complaint
under sections 3, 4, 5 of Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 in the trial Court with the averments
that he has purchased a house bearing land Khasra Nos. 4129 and 4128, measuring 1500 sq.ft. situated at Mohal Karkha, Mouza Kirani, Tappa Shandinzai No.1, Tehsil City, District Quetta from one Ziarat Gul son of Haji Faiz Muhammad and after purchase of the property,
the possession of house was handed over to th e complainant, as such, he was enjoying the
peaceful possession of the property in question. It is further submitted by the petitioner that
he has started construction work in the house in question, but in the meanwhile, he became ill and the construction work was stopped and after his recovery from ailment when he visited the property, it was surprised that the respondent No.1 with connivance of his other companions have broken the locks of house and illegally occupied the same; despite of the fact, the co mplainant has produced its titled documents, but the respondent No.1 was
reluctant to vacate the possession. That the learned trial Court on receipt of complaint called for the report from the SHO concerned and after going through the same, came to the conclusion that the matter pertains to a civil dispute; thus, dismissed the complaint of the
petitioner vide impugned order as mentioned hereinabove in para No.1.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record minutely, which reveals
that the petitioner claimed to be the recorded owner of the house constructed upon the land
bearing Khasra Nos. 4129 and 4128, measuring 1500 sq.ft. situated at Mohal Karkha, Mouza Kirani, Tappa Shandinzai No.1, Tehsil City, District Quetta, which was forcibly occ upied by
the respondent No.1 and his companion i.e. respondent No.2 in his absence, but according to the report dated 15th April, 2016 submitted by the SHO concerned; wherein it is clearly mentioned that the house about which the complainant is claiming, i s in the possession of
one Muhammad Azeem and the said Muhammad Azeem further rented out the said house to one Muhammad Ayoub Bugti. It is pertinent to mention here that the petitioner has failed to
make Muhammad Azeem and Muhammad Ayoub Bugti as party in his complaint, however, he has made both of them as party in the present petition. In the interest of justice number of times notices were issued for them, but however, none appeared on behalf of respondent No.3; however, one Mr. Lakhmi Chand Khurana, Advocate appeared on behalf of respondent No.2 and thereafter he remained absent, but however, appeared today, while service was not effected upon the respondent No.3. Be that as it may, since both the respondents were not party to the complaint, as such, no purpose could be served for their presentation. The record further reflects that civil litigation between the parties with regard to disputed property were remained pending before the Civil Courts and the report of SHO concerned shows that there is a busin ess dispute of property, cash and cars between the complainant, the respondent
No.1 and Muhammad Azeem. In view of the above, it appears that the parties have already tried to resolve the dispute through civil litigations, but however, as a counterblast fi led this
complaint and the learned trial Court has rightly opined that the matter between parties pertains to civil dispute and made following observations:
"4. After hearing the learned counsel for complainant and perused the report called from SHO. The perusal of report dated 15.04.2016 produced by the SHO shows that
the house about which the complainant is claiming is in the possession of one Muhammad Azim. The said Muhammad Azim has rented out this house to one Muhammad Ayub Bugti. The complainant fail ed to make Muhammad Azim as party
in this complaint. The complainant is also not alleging or claiming of illegal
dispossession of the said house against Muhammad Azim. The complainant is
claiming that the respondent No.1 has forcefully dispossessed him from the said house, while on the other hand the report of SHO shows that it is in the possession of Muhammad Azim and he rented out the same. This report also shows that the complainant is the owner of this house as per Tehsil and Revenue record. This report
also shows that there is a business dispute of property, cash and cars between the
complainant, respondent No.1 and Muhammad Azim. The parties also tried to resolve
the dispute through arbitrators. The bare perusal of record and arguments extended by the learned counsel for complainant shows that the nature of dispute between the
complainant and respondent No.1 is a business dispute and of a civil nature. The possession as per report of SHO is also with one Muhammad Azim, who was not made as party in this complaint. The main purpose of Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005
is quite clear that the said act is connecting to curb the activities of the property grabbers. It also protects 'the lawful owner and occupiers of immovable properties from their illegal or fo rcible dispossession, there from by property grabbers."
4. Since matter pertains to factual controversy which could be resolved after thorough
inquiry and recording of evidence in a Civil Court, in this respect reference can be made to
the case of "Secretary to the Government of Punjab v. Ghulam Nabi (PLD 2001 SC 415),
wherein it was held that:
"It hardly needs any elaboration that "the superior Courts should not involve themselves into investigations of disputed question of fact which, necessitate taking of evidence. This can more appropriately be done in the ordinary Civil Procedure for litigation by a suit. This extraordinary jurisdiction is intended primarily, for providing an expeditious remedy in a case where the illegality of the impugned action of a n
executive or other authority can be established without any elaborate enquiry into complicated or disputed facts".
In view of the above the findings of the trial Court do not suffer from illegality or
irregularity to warrant interference by this Court.
For the reasons discussed hereinabove, the petition being devoid of merit is
dismissed.
SA/153/Bal. Petition dismissed.This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error,
let us know.