Maqbool Ahmad vs State etc
This matter concerns a petition for pre-arrest bail filed by the petitioner, Maqbool Ahmad, in connection with FIR No. 174/2019 registered under Sections 420, 468, and 471 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The allegations involve a property dispute regarding the possession of a 10-marla plot, which the complainant claims was purchased by her deceased husband, while the petitioner is accused of illegal possession. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to pre-arrest bail given the civil nature of the underlying dispute and the lack of specific allegations of forgery against him. The Court held that the dispute was essentially civil in nature, as evidenced by existing litigation and the status of the mutation, and that the criminal proceedings appeared to be an attempt to resolve a civil possession issue. Consequently, the Court confirmed the petitioner's pre-arrest bail. The key principle laid down is that criminal proceedings should not be utilized to settle disputes that are essentially civil in nature, particularly when the matter involves property possession and existing civil litigation, thereby establishing that such cases warrant pre-arrest bail.
- Can criminal proceedings be initiated to resolve a dispute regarding the possession of property that is already the subject of civil litigation?
- Does the absence of specific allegations of forgery against an accused in an FIR involving property disputes support the grant of pre-arrest bail?
- Is a case involving a property mutation dispute and possession claims considered a matter for civil courts rather than criminal prosecution?
- Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 468, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 471, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 448, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 511, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in case-FIR No. 174/2019. dated 13.03.2019, under Sections 420, 468, 471, PPC, registered at Police Station Saddar Burewala, District Vehari on the allegation that deceased husband of the Complainant, a police official =died during service who had purchased 10 marla plot in Chak Nos. 259/EB, Tehsil Burewala out of Khewat No. 65/65, Khatooni Nos. 282 to 284 from co-accused Muhammad Usman who also executed an agreement on 04.11.201 1 before the Sub-Registrar . A mutation No. 3259 was also entered but when the complainant demanded possession of said plot. he refused, hence this FIR.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner , learned Additional Prosecutor General and perusing the file, it is straightaway observed that mutation No. 3259 was sanctioned in favour of the husband of the complainant but the dispute 'relates to the handing over of possession of said plot measuring 10 marlas is pending. Muhammad Usman was granted pre-arrest bail by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge but vide order dated 08.12.2020 passed by this Court in this petition, a notice was issued to him for recalling of the bail granting order His case is that the possession was hand ed over to the complainant but later a suit for specific performance was filed by one Asif Mehmood against Maqbool Ahmad/petitioner in respect of mutatio n No 2335 of plot measuring 18 marlas, therefore, possession can be taken in accordance with law. The case of Maqbool. Ahmad petitioner is that he is not named in the FIR and has not alleged to have any forged document and that he had lodged FIR No. 179/201 1, dated 17.05.201 1, under Sections 448, 511, 148, 149, PPC, at Police Station Saddar Burewala, District Vehari against said Muhammad Usman. It is not denied by the complainant side that suit for possession of the said plot has been filed. It is also come on record that two mutations No. 2335 and 3259 are of two different years as later relating to the complainant was made in the year 2011. During the proceed ings, a report was prepared by Liaqat Ali/SI on 08.04.2021 according to which Maqbool Ahmad was found in illegal possession of 10 marlas plot.
These facts suggest that the possession can be taken on the basis of suit for possession if the said mutation is still intact. Muhammad Usman was granted bail on the basis of facts and record. Admittedly , a house has been constructed 5/6 years ago on the said 10 marlas plot. In the facts and circumstances, the offence under Sections 420, 468, 470 need further investigation. Mala fide of the complainant is apparent as the matter of civil litigation is stretched into criminal litigation as it is a case of taking possession of plot based on mutation of the property which has been occupied and utilized by Maqbool Ahmad/petitioner .
3. For the foregoing reasons, the case for grant of pre-arrest bail is made out. Resultantly , this bail petition is allowed and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioner is confirmed subject to his furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-w ith two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
4. Notice issued to Usman co-accused by this Court on 08.12.2020 who was granted bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge is withdrawn