| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2007 SLG 3264 2007 SLD 3264 2007 PLJ 101 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Crl. P. No. 17-P of 2006, decided on 17.5.2006.
CH. IJAZ AHMED & SYED, JAMSHED ALI, JJ.
Mr. Afridi Khan, ASC and Mir Adam Khan, AOR for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents.
Crl. P. No. 17-P of 2006, decided on 17.5.2006.
CH. IJAZ AHMED & SYED, JAMSHED ALI, JJ.
Mr. Afridi Khan, ASC and Mir Adam Khan, AOR for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents.
ABDUL AHAD
VS
AMJAD ALI & others--Respondents
Law:
Section:
Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860)-- ----Ss. 419, 420, 468, 471, 109 & 34--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 185(3)--Leave to appeal, refused--Proceedings were stayed--Assailed--Validity--Criminal proceedings should be stayed pending the decision of civil suit but the matter was one of discretion entirely--Guiding principle should be to see as to whether the accused was likely to be prejudicial if the criminal proceedings were not stayed in case of dispute regarding title where it was difficult to draw a line between a bonafide claim and the criminal action--All the Courts below had exercised discretion in favour of the respondent keeping in view the guiding principles laid down by the Superior Courts--No infirmity or illegality was found in the impugned --Petition dismissed. [Pp. 102 & 103] A PLD 1968 SC 281 and 1971 PCr.LJ 331. Order Ch. Ijaz Ahmed, J.--The petitioner has sought leave to appeal against the judgment of the learned Peshawar High Court dated 16.1.2006 through this petition. 2. The brief facts out of which the present petition arises are that petitioner filed a complaint before Ilaqa Qazi under Sections 419/420/468/471/109/34 PPC. The respondent filed application for stay of the proceedings on the ground that civil suit had already been filed before the competent Court which was pending adjudication. The Qazi concerned stayed the proceedings vide order dated 18.10.2004 which was upheld up to the level of the learned Peshawar High Court vide impugned judgment dated 16.1.2006. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned Courts below erred in law to stay the proceedings without adopting the proper procedure as prescribed by the Code of Criminal Procedure. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. The learned Peshawar High Court had considered the contentions of learned counsel of the petitioner and rejected the same as is evident from para 3 of the impugned judgment which is reproduced hereunder:-- "Admittedly, the suit house is not the exclusive ownership of the petitioner. He is owner of the house in question…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492