Case Details

Citation(s)
2020 SLG 1898 2020 SLD 1898 2020 MLD 1616
Sindh High Court
Criminal Revision Application No. S-27 of 2011, decision & hearing Date : 15-11-2019
AFTAB AHMED GORAR, JUSTICE
A.M. Mobeen Khan for Applicant/Complainant. Aijaz Ahmed Naich for Private
Respondent No. 4. Syed Sardar Ali Shah, DPG for the State

KHUSHI MUHAMMAD

VS

THE STATE THROUGH DEPUTY PROSECUTOR-GENERAL, SUKKUR AND 8 OTHERS

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 203

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 203---Dismissal of complaint---Dispute of civil nature---Scope assailed order passed by Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, whereby his direct complaint was dismissed under S.203, Cr.P.C. had sought cognizance in the case by alleging that fraud was committed by Mukhtiarkar and Tapedar in collusion with the respondents---Sale deed on the basis of which the applicant had claimed his right over the property was disbelieved by the competent civil court and the same was declared as null and void had failed to produce material which constituted any offence allegedly committed by the respondents---Dispute between the parties was purely of civil nature but the applicant in order to create harassment and pressure over the respondents had filed the direct complaint and had tried to convert the civil litigation into criminal---Revision application was dismissed, in circumstances. Rafique Bibi v. Muhammad Sharif and others 2006 SCMR 512 and Muhammad Fiaz Khan v. Ajmer Khan and another 2010 SCMR 105 distinguished. ORDER AFTAB AHMED GORAR, JUSTICE:---.--- The applicant/complainant by way of instant Criminal Revision Application has impugned order dated 18.01.2011, passed by learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption Sukkur, whereby his direct complaint was dismissed under Section 203 Cr.P.C. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant/complainant that the learned trial Court has dismissed the complaint of the applicant without lawful justification, ignoring the fact that the applicant was able to make out a case for cognizance of his complaint; that the learned trial Court has committed glaring irregularities and patent improprieties while dismissing the direct complaint; that there is no bar to initiate both civil as well as criminal proceedings simultaneously; that the learned trial Court has failed to consider that the statements of the witnesses Ghulam Muhammad and Rehmat Ali recorded by the Circle Officer, ACE Ghotki under the orders of learned trial Court; that there was sufficient material in shape of documentary evidence available with the trial Court for bringing the direct complaint on regular file. He has lastly…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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