Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3191/B of 1976, decided on 29th September 1976.
---S. 497‑Delay in lodging F. I. R.--‑Petitioners, accused of getting notation fraudulently attested before Revenue officer‑Petitioners, however, claiming to be bona fide purchasers of disputed land for valuable consideration and as being in continuous possession for last .8 years‑F. I. R. lodged after long 8 years‑--Bail confirmed, in circum stances.‑[Bail].
Asif Sajjad Jan and Sh. Abdul Aziz for Petitioner.
S. M. Idrees for the Complainant.
Rashid Awan for the State.
This order would dispose of Crl. Misc. No. 3191/ B‑76, filed by Mukhtar Ahmad, and Crl. Misc. No. 3235/B‑76, filed by Abdul Majid. Abdul Ghani Faizi Abdul Hamid Faizi, Khurshid Ahmad, Abdul Qayyum, Mohammad Iqbal, Iftikhar Ahmad and Abdul Salam, as all of them are accused of the same case.
2. A case under sections 420, 463, 471, P. P. C. was registered at Police Station, Satellite Town, Gujranwala, on the written application of Lal Khan, dated 20‑5‑1976, which was addressed to Chief Minister, Punjab. The complainant levelled allegation that some person in place of his father Ghulam Mohy‑ud‑Din, who was missing since lath October, 1967, had been produced before the Revenue Officer and the mutation was got attested fraudulently.
3. The case of the, petitioners is that the petitioners had purchased 19 kanals 8 marlas of land from Ghulam Mohy‑ud‑Din on 4‑8‑1960, through a registered sale deed but subsequently the land allotted to Ghulam Mohy-ud‑Din was cancelled and in lieu of that land, Ghulam Mohy‑ud‑Din transferred the disputed 30 kanals 10 marlas of land to the petitioners and got arrested the mutation. It is contended that Niaz Mohammad Lambardar and Mohammad Yaseen Ex‑Patwari had identified Ghulam Mohy‑ud‑Din before the Revenue Officer at the time of the attestation of mutation. It is further contended that it was not requirement of law to obtain thumb -impressions of vendor and the attesting witnesses and the thumb‑impressions on the disputed mutation bad been got affixed by the complainant party that there was a delay of 8 years in lodging the F. I. R. of this case and during this period, the petitioners remained in continuous possession.
4. I have considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners. The thumb‑impressions of Ghulam Mohy‑ud‑Din vendor and the two attesting witnesses Niaz Mohammad Lambardar and Allah Wadhaya Chaukidar have been axed over the order of the Revenue Officer, which is unusual. There is a counter version and according to the petitioners, they were the bona fide purchasers for valuable consideration. There is a delay of 8 years in lodging the F. I. R. of this case. Taking all these circumstances into consideration, I confirm the bail of the petitioners. They shall join the investigation if and when required.
Bail allowed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer