Case Details

Citation(s)
2010 SLG 1498 2010 SLD 1498 2010 YLR 495
Sindh High Court
Criminal Revision Application No. S-45 of 2009, decision Dated: 17-11-2009.
FAISAL ARAB, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Irfan Ahmed Qureshi
Respondent(s) by: Shahid Ahmed Shaikh, A.P.G.

MUHAMMAD ALI

VS

IVTH ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, HYDERABAD AND 8 OTHERS

Law: Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005

Section: 3,5

Illegal Dispossession Act (XI of 2005)--- ----Preamble, Ss. 3 & 5---Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005---Scope---Scope of Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 could not be confined only to persons having antecedent of land grabbers or qabza group or Land mafia---Applicant could not be forced to first establish that the persons, who had illegally dispossessed him belonged to a group of land grabbers, qabza group or land mafia in order to maintain proceedings under Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005---Such could not be the intention of law makers---Section 3 of Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 which defined the criminal act, clearly covered every act of dispossession committed by any person irrespective of the fact whether he committed such act individually or in consort with other persons; it was also not necessary that accused who had committed the illegal act of dispossession should already be known to be a member of land grabbers or qabza group or land mafia---Respondents in their defence claimed that they had not occupied any portion of land in question, and claimed that land belonging to Irrigation Department, had only been occupied by them---Held, to solve such rival claims it was necessary that the Revenue Record should be before the Trial Court for its examination---Question whether any portion of survey number in question had been occupied or encroached upon by the respondents or not was to be ascertained and in case the answer was in affirmative, only then cognizance of the offence was to be taken as it was a case of dispossession---Both the counsel in the present case having agreed to that legal position, impugned order was set aside and case was remanded to the Trial Court, which after examining the revenue record would decide whether survey number in question had been encroached upon by the respondents. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: FAISAL ARAB, J.--- The applicant is owner of survey number 101. He filed a complaint under section 5 of Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 against his neighboring Zamindars i.e. private respondents who own survey number 138. It is alleged that they have encroached upon part of applicant's survey number 101. This Criminal Revision…
🔒
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