MUHAMMAD AKRAM KHAN Versus THE STATE

ORDER

The petitioner is one of the six accused who have been summoned as accused persons by a Magistrate First Class on the complaint of respondent Aftab Ahmad under sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 read with section 109, P. P. C. Mst. Nazir Begum a sister of Aftab Ahmad respondent executed a sale-deed on 21st of February 1974, of agricultural land measuring 28 kanals 2 marlas from her joint khata. The petitioner, Raja Muhammad Akram Khan is one of the marginal witnesses. It is also submitted that the husband of Me. Nazir Begum was also a marginal witness. A mutation was sanctioned on 12th of March 1974, in respect of the same.

2. On 22nd of March 1974, Aftab Ahmad brought a civil suit challeng ing the sale of land by his sister. On 12th of April 1974, he filed a com plaint against six persons including the petitioner making allegations of forgery and fraud against them in respect of the same sale. The civil suit was dismiss. ed in default on 4th of January 1975, but the matter was argued before me at the preliminary hearing that the civil suit was still pending. Aftab Ahmad has not followed the proceedings in the civil Court but Mst. Nazir Begum filed a civil suit on 3rd of February 1975. Alleging that she had never sold the land in question and that her husband was not a signatory to the sale deed. She applied for a temporary injunction. Her application was dis missed on 5th of March 1975. She filed an appeal which was dismissed on 4th April of 1975. She filed a revision petition namely. C. R. No. 476/A of 1975 which was dismissed by the High Court on 22nd of May 1975. Abdul Ghafoor Lodhi, J. observed that the Courts below were justified in coming to the conclusion that the petitioner had no prima facie case and that the deed having been duly registered, the initial presumption would be that of its correctness.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the real question before both the criminal and civil Courts is that of the genuineness of the sale-deed and that on the principle enunciated by the Supreme Court, it is urged that the criminal proceedings should be quashed or at least kept pending till the decision of the civil suit.

4. The learned counsel for Aftab Ahmad, respondent, submits that the Magistrate had some data to proceed with the matter and that the signatures of Mst. Nazir Begum were taken by the Magistrate and got com pared with her signatures alleged to have been affixed in the register of the petition-writer. The Handwriting Expert has said that the signatures on the register do not tally with her genuine signatures obtained by the Magistrate.

Mr. Qadir Bakhsh, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, submits, that the sale-deed is in the possession of the vendee and that the proceedings regarding taking of signatures were ex parte and that in any case the signatures on the sale-deed had not been compared. This is however, a question of detail of evidence and the correctness of the Handwriting Expert's opinion can be tested during the proceedings.

5. The learned counsel for the State submits that during the pendency of the proceedings in the civil Court, the criminal proceedings be stayed.

6. In view of the fact that the civil Court is already cognizant of the question of the genuineness of the sale-deed, to which a presumption of correctness attached, I think it would not be proper to permit the criminal proceedings to go on. I, therefore, direct that till the decision of the civil suit the criminal proceedings shall be stayed.

S. Q. Petition accepted.