ABDUL REHMAN alias REHMAN vs State Ss — 2024 PCrLJ 223 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

ABDUL REHMAN alias REHMAN VS State Ss. 265-K, 249-a & 561-a---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 395---Dacoity---Provision(s) of S. 249-a or 265-K of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898---Scope---Extra-ordinary circumstances---Prosecution case was that the petitioner/accused, along with co-accused duly armed with weapons entered into the house (house-in-question) and looted away valuable articles---application under S. 265-K of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898, filed by the petitioner/accused was declined by the Trial Court; he assailed said dismissal order before the High Court---Complainant asserted himself as a tenant at house-in-question(place of alleged occurrence) on behalf of a person with whom the petitioner/accused had civil/criminal litigations since long while he (accused) claimed himself to be the owner of house-in-question---Validity---allegation(s) had been that of house-trespass and that of stealing away household articles etc.---Normally such allegations would require due trial but if the alleged accused, on the other hand, had been involved in litigation in respect of same premises (house-in-question) since purchase, then such case would be an exception because no offence of trespass could be made against occupant, claimed purchaser or tenant, even if such claim was under litigation; as such alleged occurrence could not constitute an act of trespass on the part of the accused---Even the complainant himself while recording his evidence adduced/suggested that accused persons had committed the occurrence directing the co-accused to vacate their house---Record revealed that as independent witnesses (Chowkidar etc.) had not supported the complainant's version so the report under S. 173, Cr.P.C, 1898, was submitted in a-Class (discharge of nominated accused)---Though the Court of Magistrate was competent to take cognizance on even a negative report (under S. 173, Cr.P.C, 1898), but said act never absolved the Court, while deciding an application under S. 249-a or 265-K of Cr.P.C, 1898, from examining the undeniable or undisputed documents/facts like one(s) relating to previous civil as well as criminal litigation amongst the parties---Court was also to weigh the possibility that prosecution would not be able to prove charge for any offence against the petitioner/accused even if the trial would have been allowed to continue---Present case was one of extraordinary circumstances, hence High Court quashed the proceedings of Trial Court against the petitioner/accused---Petition moved by the petitioner/accused under S. 561-a of the Cr.P.C, 1898, was allowed, in circumstances.

ABDUL REHMAN alias REHMAN vs State Ss — 2024 PCrLJ 223 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PCRLJ