ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Criminal Appeal No. 09 of 2022

________________________________________________________

Date                      Order with signature of Judge

1. For orders on office objection.

2. For hearing of Main Case.

26.02.2024.

Mr. Azizullah M. Buriro, Advocate along with Appellants(on bail), except appellant Sabir.

Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Additional Prosecutor General.

Mr. Javed Ahmed Soomro, Advocate along with respondent No.1/complainant Abdul Razak Wadho.  

O R D E R

Muhammad Saleem Jessar, J:- Through instant Criminal Appeal, the appellants have assailed the judgment dated 30.03.2022 passed by learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Mehar, in Sessions Case No.330/2020 (Re: Abdul Razak Wadho v. Aziz Wadho & others) whereby appellants, namely, 1) Aziz, 2) Hizbullah, 3) Nek Muhammad, all three sons of Haji Adho, 4) Sabir son of Nek Muhammad, 5) Khalid son of Punhal, 6) Jalal son of Punhal, and 7) Shaman son of Punhal, have been convicted for offence under Section 3(2) of Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default whereof to undergo S.I. for three months more; the appellants have also been directed to pay compensation to the complainant for Rs.100,000/- jointly to the complainant in terms of Section 544, Cr.P.C. The Mukhtiarkar as well as the SHO concerned were directed to restore possession of the disputed land to the complainant.

2.       During pendency of instant appeal, both parties have compromised the matter outside the Court and in this regard they have filed joint applications under Sections 345(2) & 345(6) of Cr.P.C alongwith supporting Affidavit of complainant Abdul Razak Wadho before the Court; taken on record. Accordingly, office shall assign numbers to these applications as per institution register. However, the contents of such Affidavit are affirmed by the complainant. Complainant/respondent No.1 Abdul Razak Wadho present in person, submits that possession of property in dispute has been handed over to him; therefore, he with the core of his heart has forgiven the appellants; hence, they have filed compromise applications jointly and he does not want to prosecute the appellants anymore. Complainant; however, records no objection if these applications are allowed and appellants are acquitted of the charge.

3.       The Mukhtiarkar, Taluka Mehar had filed his report with supporting affidavit to the effect that the possession of the property in dispute has been handed over to the complainant/ respondent No.1 under proper mashirnama.

4.       The appellants, who are present in person (on bail), also submit that they have already put the complainant under peaceful and vacant possession of the land in dispute. They, therefore, submit that by granting compromise applications the appeal may be disposed of and they may be acquitted of the charges.

5.       Learned Addl. P.G present in Court waives notice of these applications and while placing his reliance upon the case of AKHTER HUSSAIN v. STATION HOUSE OFFICER SACHAL KARAHI and 02 others reported in 2020 P.Cr.LJ Note 20, records his no objection, if applications are granted. 

6.       Though one of the appellant, namely, Sabir due to ailment is not in attendance today; however, learned Counsel for complainant/respondent No.1 as well as respondent No.1 present in person before the Court have no objection for his acquittal in his absence by way of compromise.

7.       Since the possession of land in dispute has been handed over to complainant/respondent No.1; therefore, the complainant does not want to prosecute the appellants anymore; hence, he has entered into compromise with the appellants voluntarily and has raised no objection for grant of these applications as well as disposal of the appeal accordingly. Learned DPG as well as learned Counsel for respondent No.1/complainant have also extended no objection.   

8.       In view of above, it is observed that compromise entered into between the parties appears to be genuine, lawful and without any pressure or coercion from any side and that complainant has voluntarily forgiven the appellants / accused. Therefore, keeping in view the cordial relations between the parties in future, the application under Section 345(2) Cr.P.C is hereby granted; resultantly, the application under Section 345(6) Cr.P.C is accepted. The appellants are acquitted of the charges by way of compromise. They are present on bail; their bail bonds stand cancelled and surety(ies) is/are hereby discharged.

9.       Appeal stands disposed of in above terms. 

                                                                                                JUDGE