Manzoor

IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS JUDGE, MULTAN.

Manzoor Ahmad S/o Allah Yar, caste Ronga, R/o Mohallah Mehmood Abad, (Police Station Mumtazabad) Multan. Plaintiff VERSUS 1.

Ch. Shafqat Ali S/o Ch. Jhanda, caste Jat, R/o Masoom Shah Road, Multan.

2.

Malik Allah Bakhsh

sons of Malik Allah Ditta,

3.

Malik Muhammad Bakhsh

caste Bhutta, R/o outside Pak Gate, Multan.

4.

Muhammad Arif Zia, City Magistrate/Ilaqa Magistrate (Administrative) Police Station Mumtazabad, Multan. Respondents Revision Petition U/s-349 Cr.P.C. read with 435 Cr.P.C. against the order dated 13.4.2001 passed by the Executive Magistrate, P.S. Mumtazabad for the sealing of property of petitioner while conducting proceeding U/s 145 Cr.P.C.

CLAIM IN REVISION: To set aside the impugned order, deseal the property and to restore the possession to the petitioner.

Respectfully Sheweth: 1.

That on 12.4.2001, S.H.O. P.S. Mumtazabad submitted a request before the respondent No. 4 that there is a dispute of property between the respondent No. 1 and 2 & 3. Both the parties are declaring themselves as to be the owners of disputed property. There is a situation of law and order. So, a

decision regarding the disputed property, after conducting the proceedings under section 145 Cr.P.C. Upon this request, the respondent No. 4, after recording the statement of respondent No. 1 ordered to seal the disputed property on 13.4.2001. Copy of request along-with order and statement of respondent No. 1 are enclosed as Annexes “A & B”. 2.

That the impugned order dated 13.4.2001 is liable to be set aside inter alia on the following: GROUNDS i)

That the impugned order is against the natural justice and law of equity.

ii)

That the impugned order is against the facts and prevailing law.

iii)

That the impugned order is passed in the haste and without proper application of judicial mind.

iv)

That the provisions, intention, and essence of section 145 Cr.P.C. was not kept in mind while the impugned order was passed.

v)

That initially the application was against the petitioner and petitioner was dislodged from the disputed property. The household material worth Rs. 200,000/- is still lying inside the said property. At the time of sealing the property, there were more than 500 people present on the spot, and it was unanimously sworn by those people that the disputed property is in the possession and ownership of the petitioner. This situation in the favour of petitioner compelled the respondent No. 4 to change the situation and by this reason, respondents No. 2 & 3 were inducted in the matter. It is pertinent to point out that the respondents No. 1 to 3 have no concern whatsoever with the disputed property.

vi)

That during the pendency of civil litigation, respondent No. 4 has no authority to initiate the proceedings under section 145 Cr.P.C. So, the impugned order is unwarranted under the law, and, the respondent No. 4 departed from the jurisdiction available to him.

vii)

That section 145 Cr.P.C. does not stop any Magistrate to proceed further with the matter after sealing the property U/s 145 (4) Cr.P.C. from conducting an inquiry regarding the possession of any party within a period of last two months but no such efforts were further made to meet with the situation, and the matter is like a hanging sword on the head of the petitioner.

viii) That illegality also committed when respondent No. 4 ignored the provisions of section 145 (6) Cr.P.C. and the petitioner was illegally evicted from the property. ix)

That the change of parties and exclusion of proceedings conducted at the spot from the record transpire the bias and partial behaviour of the respondent No. 4.

x)

That the petitioner and his family is left shelter-less due to the high handedness committed by the respondent No. 4 to benefit respondent No. 1 illegally.

xi)

That the impugned order as well as act and conduct of the respondents caused a great miscarriage of justice to the petitioner.

It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the impugned order dated 13.4.2001 passed by the respondent No. 4 may please be set aside declaring illegal, unlawful, unwarranted and ultra vires to the extent of the rights of the petitioner. It is further prayed that till the disposal of this petition, the property in question may please be

desealed and the possession be restored to the petitioner. Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the given circumstances, may please be extended to meet the ends of justice. Humble Petitioner, Dated: ____________ (Manzoor Ahmad)

Through: Ch. Shafqat Khan, Advocate High Court, 12-Aziz Block, District Courts, Multan.