Syed Basharat Hussain Shah vs State Ss — 2026 MLD 594 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

Syed Basharat Hussain Shah VS State Ss. 3 & 4---Illegal dispossession of property---Appreciation of evidence---Civil dispute over property between the parties---Scope---Accused-appellants were charged for dispossessing the complainant from his property and taking illegal possession of the land---Accused was convicted and sentenced by the Trial Court---Validity---Record showed that on 17.11.2017 complainant filed asuit for declaration qua the same property against the appellant and others, wherein appellant appeared before the Civil Court concerned and stated that he was in possession of his own land and had not grabbed the land of complainant which was disposed of accordingly---On 15.09.2020 complainant moved an application under S.67-B of the Land Revenue Act, 1967 for taking possession of the suit land against the appellant on the basis of demarcation report dated 22.04.2019 prepared by the Revenue Officer concerned, which too was dismissed by the Assistant Commissioner concerned and appeal filed by the appellant against demarcation report dated 22.04.2019 was accepted by the appellate authority concerned---On 07.04.2021 father of complainant, filed suit for possession regarding the suit land against the appellant---During pendency of the said suit, on 03.02.2022 with the delay of more than ten months instant private complaint by concocting a new story had been filed by the complainant against the same suit land whereafter his father had withdrawn his suit for possession to file fresh one, which was allowed vide order dated 15.02.2023 but fresh suit had not been filed yet---In earlier trial, appellant was convicted and sentenced by the Trial Court but in Criminal Appeal filed by appellant matter was remanded with the observations that the demarcation report posited that Revenue Officer simply stated that Khasra No. 201 had been considered permanent point by the persons present there and from that Khasra without determining its exact location started demarcation of the disputed Khasra numbers---Demarcation report did not figure out that Revenue Officer had determined three permanent points from different angles after determining their exact location to demarcate the suit land, violation of which made the demarcation report unreliable---Every dispute of the possession/dispossession of immovable property does not fall within the ambit of provisions of S.3 of the Act---To constitute an offence under S.3 of the Act, the complainant must disclose the existence of both i.e. an unlawful act (actus reas) and criminal intent (mens rea)---Act was enacted to shield the persons in settled possession from land grabbers and violent or lawless ouster, not to furnish a shortcut for private parties in domestic civil dispute---Moreover, provisions of said Act operated as protections, not weapons---It was apparent that even if it was ultimately established that the appellant was in occupation of an area owned by the complainant, there was no indication that appellant had the necessary criminal intent---Dispute between the parties was of purely civil nature as to the exact location of their respective parcels of land, for which suit for possession qua the suit land was rightly filed by father of complainant which was withdrawn after filing instant complaint---Complainant could file fresh suit for possession in that respect, if so desired---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Syed Basharat Hussain Shah vs State Ss — 2026 MLD 594 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 MLD