' IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, J.---Through this writ petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the petitioners have sought quashment of proceedings under.
Sections 107/150, Cr.P.C. Pending before the Special Magistrate Model Town, Lahore.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioners are residing at House No,1 Fasih Road, New Islamia Park, Lahore; whereas private respondents are residing at House No,10, Gali No,31, Aslam Khan Road in the same vicinity. There is a dispute between the parties regarding an amount of Rs,3,00,000 for which petitioner No,2 has filed a suit for recovery of the said amount against respondents Nos.3 and 4. Both the parties moved, separate applications before the learned Justice of Peace/Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore against each other, who passed the orders to take legal action, who is found to have committed cognizable offence. The claim of the petitioner No,2 is that he had approached S.H.O. Concerned for compliance of said order, but he instead of taking action against respondents Nos.3 and 4, has initiated proceedings under sections 107/150, Cr.P.C.
Which have been challenged through petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the police with mala fide intention have initiated proceedings under sections 107/150, Cr.P.C. And they should have taken action against the other party in compliance of the order passed by the learned Justice of Peace.
3-A. The learned counsel for the respondents has opposed this writ petition on the ground that the respondents had also moved an application to the learned Justice of Peace in which order was passed for taking legal action and there being apprehension of danger, the proceedings under sections 107/150, Cr.P.C. Have been initiated and writ petition may be dismissed.
4. The learned Asstt. Advocate-General also contends that this writ petition may be dismissed as the petitioners should have no objection for submitting the bail bonds before the Court for maintaining the peace.
5. I have heard the argument advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with due care and caution.
6. According to Qalandara, the petitioners and the respondents are close relatives and residing in the same vicinity and between their houses, a vacant plot is situated; that one window towards the house of petitioners was installed in the house of respondent No,3, which was closed and petitioner No,2 had paid an amount of Rs,3,00,000 for closure of the said window, but subsequently petitioner No,2 had demanded back the said amount, which was refused and civil litigation A started between the parties in this regard. The police has also stated that both the parties have moved applications repeatedly against each other and feeling apprehension of danger due to strained relations between the parties, the police has initiated proceedings under sections 107/150, Cr.P.C.
Due to the pendency oflitigation between the parties and filing of different applications against each other for taking legal action, the proceedings initiated by the police under sections 107/150, Cr.P.C. Cannot be declared to be void without recording evidence, which is not permissible in writ jurisdiction. The petitioners have alternate remedy by approaching the same Court of the Judicial Magistrate, if they have any grievance against initiation of the proceedings as in subsection (1) of section 107, Cr.P.C. Itself it is provided that after the submission of information by the police regarding breach of peace etc., if in the opinion of the Magistrate, there is sufficient ground for proceedings, he may require such person to show-cause why he should not be ordered to execute bail bond for keeping the peace. The learned Magistrate after hearing the parties can drop the proceedings if allegations contained in the Qalandara are not found sufficient to ask both the parties to execute their bail bonds. Hence this writ petition is not maintainable, which is dismissed.