THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Revision Application No.72 of 2025

Present:

Mr. Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi

Applicants : Musarrat Shah and Imtiaz Ali Shah through Mr. S. M. Naseer Nihal Hashmi, advocate

Respondent No.1 : Master Mustafa Saim through Mr. Ahmed Khan Bugti, advocate

The State : Through Mr. Zahoor Shah, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh

Date of Hearing : 06.05.2025

Date of Order : 06.05.2025

O R D E R

Shamsuddin Abbasi, J.—Applicants have impugned the order dated 13.03.2025, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Karachi South in Illegal Dispossession Complaint No.4251/2024 filed by respondent No.1 through his mother. Respondent No.1 has filed Illegal Dispossession Complaint along with application under Section 7 of the Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 and learned trial Court after hearing the parties has allowed the application and issued writ of possession through Bailiff.

2. Learned counsel for applicant submits that impugned order is illegal for the reasons that issue involved between the parties is of civil nature and criminal Court has no jurisdiction to take cognizance of a civil nature matter; that Suit No.1457/2022 was rejected by learned competent civil Court vide order dated 29.03.2024; that the applicants are lawful owner of the property and the learned trial Court has not considered the contentions raised by the applicant party in its true perspective and if the possession is handed over to the respondent, the applicants would suffer irreparable losses. .

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and Additional Prosecutor General Sindh have supported the impugned order, which has been passed after fair evaluation of material available on record and in accordance with law, therefore, this criminal revision application is not maintainable.

4. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned counsel for respondent No.1 as well as Additional Prosecutor General Sindh and perused the material available on record.

6. It is a matter of record that Illegal Dispossession Complaint No.4251/2024 was brought on record along with application under Section 7 of the Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005. Learned trial Court after hearing the parties has passed order on application under Section 7 of the Act, 2005, relevant portion of the impugned order is reproduced as under:

“As far as the instant case is concerned, though it is claimed by the accused that they are in possession of the property by virtue of sale agreement referred to above executed by one Sheeraz Ali in their favour but accused failed to show any title or right of ownership of said Sheeraz Ali to alienate in the property in question.

For the foregoing discussion, reasons and being fortified by the case law cited above, I am of the considered opinion that the complainant is prima facie legal and lawful owner of the property in question and the accused are in unlawful possession/occupation of the property in question and as such the complainant is entitled to the interim relief of the recovery of possession in terms of Section 7 of the Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005.

Consequently, the application under Section 7 of the Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 filed on behalf of the complainant stands allowed. The accused are directed to put the complainant in possession of the property in question as in interim relief. Let the writ of possession be issued through bailiff of this Court.

However, it is clarified that the instant order is based on tentative assessment of the record and it is subject to the final order to be passed at the time of disposal of the case.”

7. From perusal of impugned order it reveals that learned trial Court has passed interim order which is subject to the disposal of main case, therefore, impugned order is maintained and the instant criminal revision application stands dismissed. However, learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial preferably within six months.

8. These are and reasons of my short order dated 06.05.2025.

J U D G E

Gulsher/PS