1. ' This is a petition under section 561-A Cr. P. C. For quashment of the order dated 2-6-1983 passed by Magistrate 1st Class, Jhang for the attachment of the land in dispute under section 1.45, Cr. P. C.
2. As also the proceedings pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Mang.
2. Briefly stated the facts are that Riaz Hussain respondent No, 3 filed a suit for possession averring that he had got the land in dispute by way of gift. He stated that Wali Muhammad and Khan Muhammad's claim of having got the land from the Government through registered sale-deed dated 28-4-1970 as land less tenants was illegal and void. He prayed that the said sale deed be set aside and decree for possession of the land in dispute may be passed in his favour. The suit was decreed in favour of Riaz Hussain by the civil Judge, Jhang, on 30-7-1980. Both Wali Muhammad and Khan Muhammad preferred an appeal against the said judgment and decree which was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jhang on 27-3-1983 and the judgment and decree of the trial Court were affirmed. Wali Muhammad and Khan Muhammad filed R. S. A. No, 97 of 1983 in the High Court, Lahore which stands admitted to regular hearing and is pending. As regards possession it is mentioned in the admitting note of the R. S. A. That the petitioner, if, in possession shall not be dispossessed meanwhile. On a miscellaneous application my learned brother Khalil-ur-Rehman Khan, J. Observed on 17-5-1983 that since the execution proceedings had been finalized by the Executing Court possession for the purpose of appeal (R. S. A.) shall be taken to have been delivered to the decree-holder namely, Riaz Hussain. His Lordship observed that this will, however, not prejudice the appeal pending before the appellate Court.
3. ' On 18-5-1983, S. H. O., P. S. Qadirpur prepared a Kalandra under section 145, Cr. P. C. Against Riaz Hussain, Wali Muhammad and Khan Muhammad aforementioned and submitted to the Court of Ilaqa Magistrate for initiating proceedings against Riaz Hussain on one side and Wali Muhammad and Khan Muhammad on the other under section 145, Cr. P. C. In respect of land subject matter of the R. S. A. No, 97 of 1983.
4. ' On 2-6-1983 the Ilaqa Magistrate passed a preliminary order for the attachement of the land in dispute under section 145, Cr. P. C. In pursuance of the said order the land in dispute was attached.
5. Presently the land is under attachment.
6. ' On 29-5-1983 Nasim Asghar petitioner is said to have purchased the entire disputed land from Riaz Hussain through registered sale-deed, dated 29-5-1983. Nasim Asghar petitioner has moved a petition for quashment of the proceedings under section 145, Cr. P. C. In this Court. Feeling aggrieved against the attachment order dated 2-6-1983 Wali Muhammad and Khan Muhammad filed a revision petition in the Sessions Court which is still pending and the orders of the High Court in writ petition are being awaited.
7. ' It is contended that after the decision of the civil Court the Magistrate was not competent to pass any order for attachment of the land in dispute. He states that after the execution of the decree the proceedings are illegal and without lawful authority. The Magistrate was not competent to sit over the finding of the civil Court and observation of the High Court. The process issued as such under section 145, Cr. P. C. Is abuse of the process of law. It is further stated that the possession of the land in dispute was delivered to Riaz Hussain respondent on 31-3-1983 by the Revenue Staff with the help of the police. Report of Roznamcha verified by the Collector, Jhang and affirmed by the Executing Court bears testimony to the same. It is next argued that the learned Magistrate could not after a lapse of the statutory period of two months from the date of dispossession of respondents Nos. 1 and 2 pass an order under section 145, Cr. P. C. It is also contended that the Assistant Commissioner had already passed an order on 12-5-1983 for Spurdari of wheat crops sown on the disputed land and in the presence of the said order the learned Magistrate was not competent to pass any order under section 145, Cr. P. C. Regarding the same dispute. It is next contended that apparently there is no danger of breach of peace now. The impugned older was passed on 2-6-1983 and since a considerable period has elapsed the Court has no jurisdiction in the matter for .Want of apprehension of breach of peace.
8. ' Learned counsel for Wali Muhammad and Khan Muhammad respondents had vehemently contested the petition. According to him S. Nasim Asghar petitioner has no locus standi to bring this petition because he is not an aggrieved party. He was not a party to the civil suit filed by Riaz Hussain nor is he a party to the appeal filed by Wali Muhammad and Khan Muhammad nor is he a party to the R. S. A. (No, 97 of 1983). Riaz Hussain in whose favour the civil suit was decreed and appeal decided has not filed any petition for quashment. It is further stated that the revision filed by Wali Muhammad and Khan Muhammad against attachment of the property in dispute is still pending in the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhang and the petitioners can apply to the Court for being impleaded as a party and urge all the grounds there.
9. I have considered the above contentions. Since a competent Court is already seized of the matter it would be proper if that Court is allowed to A dispose of the matter after taking into consideration all the relevant 'legal and factual issues. There is still another reason for not invoking the jurisdiction of this Court because of the involvement of factual controversy regarding the possession of the parties on the relevant date. Accordingly, I do not feel persuaded to interfere in the matter at this 'stage and in consequence dismiss the petition. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.