ORDER SHEET
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR__________________
C.P No. S - 4757 of
2015
_______________________________________________________________ DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF
JUDGE _______________________________________________________________
1. For orders on CMA
5169/2016 (U/A)
2. For orders on CMA 5170/2016
(Contempt)
02.05.2016
Mr. Iftikhar Ali Arain Advocate for
petitioner.
...............
1.
Granted.
2.
Through listed application, the petitioner alleges
contempt of Court by the alleged contemnors, as according to learned counsel
for the petitioner, in spite of disposal of instant petition vide order dated
25.03.2016 with directions to provide protection to petitioner, the alleged
contemnors have taken away 80 wheat bags from the land of the petitioner. From
perusal of the order dated 25.03.2016, it appears that instant petition was
filed by alleging harassment by the private respondents and such petition was
disposed of with the directions to the official respondents that they shall
provide protection to the petitioner in accordance with law, whereas, with
regard to dispute over the property, the parties were directed to approach the
competent Court of law. I am of the tentative view that since, there is no finding
or decision by this court with regard to title or possession over the subject
land of either party, whereas, harassment petition has been disposed with the above
observations i.e. police may provide protection in accordance with law,
therefore, the grievance expressed through instant Contempt application appears
to be beyond the scope of the reliefs sought in the instant petition. It
appears that petitioner has not approached the proper Court of jurisdiction or
the police either seeking declaration regarding title in accordance with law or
seeking protection from area police as per directions as contained in the order
dated 25.03.2016. Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that the
police has registered a criminal case against son of petitioner at the instance
of private contemnors, for which the petitioner has filed separate petition seeking
re-investigation of the F.I.R
Accordingly,
I am of the opinion that instant contempt application is misconceived in fact
and law as no violation of any specific order passed in the instant petition,
has been pointed out, hence the same is hereby dismissed. However, the
petitioner may be at liberty to seek remedy in accordance with law pursuant to subsequent
alleged harassment and may pursue the petition, whereby, registration of false FIR
against the son of petitioner has been challenged, which shall be decided on its
own merits, strictly in accordance with law and the facts as reported therein.
`
J U D G E
Irfan/PA