Savaid Ahmed son of Muhammad Khursheed Qureshi vs The State and others
This criminal miscellaneous application challenges an order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge acting as Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, whereby the applicant's petition seeking directions for the registration of a first information report against private individuals for alleged illegal occupation of a property was dismissed. The core legal question revolves around whether the Ex-Officio Justice of Peace was justified in refusing to order the registration of a criminal case where the underlying dispute is essentially civil in nature. The court held that the dispute pertained to immovable property and civil rights, and no cognizable offence was made out to warrant interference through constitutional or criminal machinery, noting that giving a criminal color to a civil dispute is impermissible. The court laid down the principle that where a matter constitutes a civil dispute regarding property possession, the appropriate remedy lies under specialized civil legislation such as the Illegal Dispossession Act rather than invoking criminal investigation or seeking directions for FIR registration.
- Whether an Ex-Officio Justice of Peace is bound to order the registration of an FIR when the dispute between the parties is primarily of a civil nature?
- Can a criminal miscellaneous application be maintained for the lodgment of an FIR regarding property possession disputes?
- Is the Illegal Dispossession Act the appropriate remedy for a person aggrieved by the alleged illegal occupation of immovable property?
- Section 22-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 22-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
M IRAN M UAHAM M AD SHAH, J.:- Through this Criminal Misc. Application, the applicant namely Savaid Ahmed son of Muhammad Khursheed Qureshi has challenged the order dated 07.02.2024, passed by the learned VIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi (West) in Criminal Misc. Application No.338 of 2024, whereby the applicant's request for the lodgment of the FIR against the proposed accused. The applicant had approached the Court of the District and Sessions/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, West at Karachi, by filing Criminal Misc. Application No.338 of 2024 under Section 22-A and 22-B Cr.P.C for seeking directions for the registration of the FIR against the proposed accused person. The matter was assigned to the learned VIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi-West, who after hearing the parties dismissed the application through the impugned order dated 07.02.2024.
Hence this application.
2. The learned counsel for the submits that the applicant is the lawful owner of an immovable property, specifically House No. L-836, Sector 4-A, Surjani Town, Karachi; that the property is registered in the name of the applicant's deceased mother, Mst. Razia Khursheed. The house had remained vacant for a long period, and the applicant had been regularly visiting the property every 2-3 months, that on 22.11.2023, during one of his routine visits, the applicant was shocked to find that some individuals had unlawfully occupied the house after forcibly breaking its locks. Upon making this discovery, the applicant raised his voice and called out to the occupants; that in response, two individuals, later identified as Touseef and Zeeshan, emerged from the premises, when the applicant inquired about their identified and their present in his property, the individuals became hostile, misbehaving, insulting, abusing and threatening the applicant, that the applicant also asked them to show any documents regarding their claim over the said house, but they failed to do so, that in contrast, the applicant showed the title documents proving his ownership of the property. Despite this, the individuals forcibly pushed the applicant out of the house and unlawfully took possession of it, that the applicant is the lawful owner of the property but the proposed Accused Touseef and Zeeshan along with their associates have illegally occupied the same. Their actions constitute a criminal offence, and they are liable for punishment under the law and furthermore, the proposed accused and their companions have continued to harass, mentally torment and threatening the applicant and his family including threats of bodily harm and even death. Under these circumstances, the applicant moved so many applications through courier service to the official respondents, for taking legal action against the proposed accused and provide legal protection for himself and his family. Despite these efforts, the respondents have failed to take any action. As the applicant has no other effective or timely remedy available, he is compelled to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court by filing the present petition for directions to respondent No.2 to record the statement of the applicant and register the FIR against the above named proposed accused and anyone who found in illegal possession of the said house without any legal authority for the cognizable offence committed by them as well as provide legal protection to applicant and his family members from the hands of proposed accused and their companions. He lastly prays for allowing the instant Criminal Misc. Application.
3. On the other hand, the learned Deputy Prosecutor General, Sindh opposes the grant of the instant Criminal Misc. Application.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. The impugned order has been challenged by the applicant for lodgment of the FIR under Section 22-A and 22-B Cr.P.C. I have gone through the impugned order, which categorically is based on the report of the SHO. The matter appears to be purely of civil dispute between the parties over the property. No cognizable offence seems to have been made out; therefore, the application of the applicant was rightly dismissed. I do not see any misreading or non-reading of the facts in the impugned order. The applicant has merely alleged that he was threatened in an attempt to give a criminal color to a civil dispute, which lacks merit. During the course of arguments, the applicant's counsel himself partially admitted that the dispute is of a civil nature, stating that the applicant's property had allegedly been illegally occupied by the private respondents. In such a case, the appropriate remedy lies under the Illegal Dispossession Act, which is available to the applicant. At the end of the arguments, this court advised the learned counsel for the applicant that he may avail himself of the remedy provided under the prescribed civil law.
5. In view of the above, the instant Criminal Misc. Application is dismissed as being devoid of any merits and not maintainable. These are the reasons of my short order dated 30.07.2025.