Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLG 4062 = 2026 SLD 4062
Islamabad High Court
Crl. Misc. No. 193-Q of 2021
Presented By: ARBAB MUHAMMAD TAHIR
   23.02.2022         Sardar        Shabbir      Hussain   Advocate     for     petitioners. Syed Shahbaz Shah, State Counsel with Naseer ASI.

Malik Tahir Nawaz & another

VERSUS

The State& another

Law: Pakistan Penal Code (PPC),1860

Section: 109, 447 , 506

Summary (Legal Core Points) The petitioners sought quashing of FIR No. 13/2021 under Sections 109, 447 & 506 PPC, contending that the dispute was purely civil in nature relating to land. The Court noted that the petitioners had already obtained pre-arrest bail and that the challan had been submitted, with the trial court having already taken cognizance. It was held that questions regarding title, sale agreement, and entitlement require evidence, which cannot be examined in constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199. The Court observed that the petitioners had an adequate alternate remedy under Sections 249-A/265-K Cr.P.C. for seeking premature acquittal before the trial court. The Court reaffirmed that mere pendency of civil litigation is not a ground to quash criminal proceedings, as civil and criminal proceedings can continue simultaneously. Held: Writ petition dismissed; FIR not quashed. Legal Core Principles FIR cannot be quashed merely because a civil dispute exists; civil and criminal proceedings may proceed concurrently. Disputed questions of fact requiring evidence cannot be adjudicated in constitutional jurisdiction. Once the trial court has taken cognizance, the accused should ordinarily avail the statutory remedy under Sections 249-A/265-K Cr.P.C., rather than seek quashment through a writ petition.           ORDER SHEET        Through the instant writ petition, petitioners (Malik Tahir Nawaz & Mirza Naveed Imdad) have prayed for quashing of FIR No.13, dated 15.01.2021, under Sections 109, 447, & 506 PPC, Police Station Bani Gala, Islamabad. 2-     As per allegations set-forth in the FIR, petitioners are accused of criminal trespass on the land of the complainant besides extending life threats.  According to the learned counsel, an attempt has been made to convert civil litigation into criminal; that the allegations constitute a civil dispute for which the parties are already in litigation, therefore, further proceedings would be abuse of process of law.    On the other hand, learned State Counsel submits that petitioners have already availed remedy of…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register