Sections 3 and 4 of the Criminal Procedure Code (V9 1898), Sections 417 (2A), 403 and 265K were filed in the appeal against the complaint that the accused had been acquitted by the complainant's father. He has met his house after demolishing the boundary bound plot. And similarly the complainant had lodged a complaint under Section 3/4 of the Settlement Act 2005, the accused had filed an application under section 265 K, CR PC, after which the complainant could hear the notice. And they were allowed. And the trial court acquitted the suspects, observing that the complainant's father sent a legal notice even though his lawyer told the defendants that they had broken the back wall of the property in 1998 and had illegally occupied it. ? Since the Unlawful Settlement Act, 2005 was enforced on June 6, 2005, without the psychological effect, no offense can be admitted for unlawful disposal prior to the commencement of the said act, the same case mentioned in the FLR. Action cannot be taken under the Act after. The accused were acquitted, while in the second round of litigation, the complaint was withdrawn under the Unlawful Settlement Act, 2005, the accused, under the circumstances, 40 403, will be acquitted in accordance with the provisions of CRPC Trial Court. However, after acquitting the accused, he exercised his powers. Random order keeping in view the facts and law proposal by applying the valid and lawful judicial mind in Section 65K, CRPC, no intervention of the High Court is required.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2012
