Find a Lawyer

Criminal Revision No. 75 and Criminal Revision No. 76 of 1984/BWP, decided on 22nd February, 1986.

‑‑‑Ss. 439‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 506, 430, 148 & 149‑‑Both parties effecting compromise and requesting Magistrate for withdrawal of cases during pendency of cross‑cases‑‑Request turned down by Magistrate‑‑Revision‑‑No body from either party suffered any injury during clash‑‑Parties resolving dispute between themselves‑‑Continuance of criminal proceedings, held, would not only cause hardship to both parties but would also disturb peaceful atmosphere prevailing between them‑‑Proceedings of both cases quashed.

Sh. Hakam Ali for Petitioner.

Muhammad Ashraf Akhtar and Sh. Inayat Ali for Respondents.

Sh. Abdul Hafeez, Public Prosecutor in person.

Date of hearing: 22nd February, 1986.

These two petitions, Criminal Revision No. 75/84/BWP and Cr.R. No. 76/84/BWP shall be disposed of by this single order as both these matters arise out of the same occurrence.

2. Briefly the facts are that Miraj Din, petitioner in Criminal Revision No. 76/84/BWP, lodged F.I.R. No. 259 of 1978 and Muhammad Akram petitioner in Criminal Revision No. 75/84‑BWP, lodged case bearing F.I.R. No. 267 of 1978, respectively, with Police Station Sadar Khanpur, blaming each other to have assaulted and diverted the water to their own land without any justification. Both the parties were challaned under sections 506, 430, 148 read with section 149, P.P.C. During the pendency of these cases, in the Court of Ilaqa Magistrate, the parties effected compromise and requested the District Magistrate that he should direct the Public Prosecutor concerned to withdraw the cases. The learned District Magistrate, Rahimyar Khan having obtained report from the Public Prosecutor, declined the prayer vide his order/letter No. 344, dated 25th March, 1984. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners have filed the aforementioned revision petition. Notices in both the petitions were issued to the State.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties.

4. It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that cases were registered in the year 1978 wherein they are facing agony of trial for the last eight years yet the cases have not been decided which constitute abuse of process of Court and as such the proceedings are liable to be quashed under section 561‑A, Cr.P.C.

5. Admittedly, no body from either party suffered any injury during the clash much-less a serious one. The dispute between the parties was over a turn of water which they have resolved between themselves. In the circumstances, if criminal proceedings are allowed to continue it A shall not only cause unnecessary hardship to them but would also disturb peaceful atmosphere prevailing between them at present, Consequently, to secure ends of justice proceedings of both the cases are hereby quashed.

H.A.K. Revision accepted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.