The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the learned Magistrate has recorded the entire evidence and the case is now reserved for pronouncement of judgment. Since civil suit in respect of the very property between the main parties is pending in which status quo order in favour of the applicants has been passed, in view of the judgement of the Honourable Supreme Court reported in 1969 SCMR 198 proceedings pending before the learned Magistrate be stayed, till the dis--posal of the civil suit in question.
The learned Advocate appearing for respondent No. Submitted, that since entire evidence is over it will not be fair to restrain the learned trial Court from pronouncing judgment, in view of the fact, that all the respondents are not party in the civil suit in question. 1n support of this contention the learned Advocate for the respondent No. 1 relied upon the cases reported in PLD 1977 SC 49, 1977 P Cr. L J 419, 1978 P Cr. L J 817 and 1981 P Cr. L J 407.
2. The learned Advocate appearing for the State on the other hand submitted, that admittedly there is a civil suit in respect of the very property between applicants and Mst. Maryum the main contesting party regarding ownership of the property in question. In view of this he supports the learned Advocate for the applicant, that the criminal proceedings in question may be stayed pending decision of the civil suit in question. The learned Advocate for the State has relied upon the cases reported in PLD 1970 SC 470, PLD 1970 Kar. 412 and PLD 1965 SC 287.
3. I have carefully considered the above submissions made by the learned counsel and have gone through the private complaint for quash--ment of his proceedings, the above petition has been filed as well as through the body of the plaint of Suit No. 1458/79 filed by Mst. Maryum and Mst.
Naziran, against the present respondent No. 1. I have also gone through the certified copy of the statement of P. W Muhammad Baqir, S. 1. Police recorded in the case pending before the S. D. M.
Under section 448/34, P. P. C. These documents reveal, that the basic dispute between the parties is over possession of the house, which is involved in all these three proceedings and this dispute arose between the parties after death of Mst. Bachi. I further find, that although the complaint filed by respondent No. 1 was under section 448/380/34, P. P. C. But after enquiry under section 200, Cr. P.
C. The case against the present applicants was registered under section 448, P. P. C. Only and consequently the dispute now in the criminal case in question and the civil suit and 145, Cr. P. C.
Proceedings, for quashment of which an application has been filed in this Court relate to the possession and ownership of the same house. In view of this I consider the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in 1969 SCMR 198 as well as PLD 1970 SC 470 is applicable to the case pending before the learned First Class Allaqa Magistrate, Bughdadi Police Station, Karachi.
4. Therefore, I would stay the proceedings pending against the apple--cants in the Court of First Class Ailaqa Magistrate, Bughdadi, Police Station, Karachi, now pending in the Court of Additional City Magistrate, Court No. 12, South, Karachi, till the disposal of Civil Suit No. 1458/791 pending in the Court of 21st Civil Judge, Karachi.
5. The above application stands disposed of in terms of above order.