The brief facts essential for the disposal of this petition are that Hamid Ali etc. Petitioners were the unauthorised cultivators of the State land comprised of Killa Nos. 1 to-4,7 to 8 of Square No.40 measuring 43 Kanals 18 Marlas situated in Chak No.433/G.B. Tehsil Samundri for Rabi 1990-91. The revenue staff by taking action under the revenue laws gave the standing crop of wheat on Superdari to Muhammad Yaqoob, respondent No.4 vide Rapt Roznamcha Waqiati No.324, dated 29-4-1991.
2. Muhammad Yaqoob respondent No.4 moved an application before the Deputy Commissioner, Faisalabad that the petitioners alongwith others removed the standing crop from the area of 14 Kanals on the night between 29/30-4-1991. He also disclosed that he moved application for taking appropriate action before the A.C. Samundri on 30-4-1991. This application was entrusted to Patwari/Girdawar Halqa and they in their reports have confirmed theft of the crop but in spite of that no action was taken against them, he also cited some persons as eye-witnesses in that application.
3. On the order of the Deputy Commissioner dated 18-5-1991, A.C: Samundri got a case registered against the petitioners and some others vide A F.I.R. No.2 50/91 Police Station Samundri, Faisalabad under sections 379 and 406, P.P.C.
4. During the pendency of the investigation of the aforesaid case an application was moved before the Deputy Commissioner which is Annexure `C', to the effect that the case registered against Muhammad Sharif petitioner and others be cancelled and the investigation be stopped as the case has been registered, with ulterior motive on account of the long-standing enmity between the complainant and the petitioners. It was also stated in the application that there was civil suit pending against the Government with respect to the title of the land in question, hence there can be no question of commission of offence under section 379/406, P.P.C. And the investigation as well as the registration of a case is illegal, unwarranted by law. This application, according to the learned counsel was moved by one of the petitioners under section 494, Cr.P.C. For the withdrawal of the prosecution to the Deputy Commissioner being the incharge of the District and responsible for maintaining law and order in accordance with the standing instructions issued by the Law Department with respect to the moving of such application. The Deputy Commissioner procured report from the Assistant Commissioner on this application and Assistant Commissioner, Samundri vide his report, dated 11-7-1991 recommended that the case should beg cancelled but the B Deputy Commissioner vide impugned order, disagreed with the finding of the Assistant Commissioner, and refused to cancel the case, hence this writ petition.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently contended: (a) that no offence is made out from the bare reading of the F.I.R., hence the whole proceedings which are likely to be taken in the investigation are nullity in the eye of law and the F.I.R. May be quashed, (b) that the petition moved by the petitioners was decided in his absence which is dear violation of the principle of natural justice, hence all the proceedings taken on this application are nullity in the eye of law on account of the legal defect mentioned above, and has placed reliance on PLD 1972 Lah. 8 and PLD 1972 Lah. 603 (c) that there is long standing enmity between the petitioners and respondent No.4 Muhammad Ayyub as they got some cases registered against the brother of respondent No.4 Muhammad Yaqoob, on account of this enmity, a fabricated and cooked up case has been got registered against the petitioners as mentioned in the section or by the D.M./Deputy Commissioner, Faisalabad, as this stage has not yet arrived when, this petition was moved. The Deputy.
Commissioner, it appears, sought some advice on the executive side from his subordinate, and thereafter considering the facts he found the findings and advice given by the A.C. Samundri is contrary to the record, and he chose to C disagree with him. This action of the Deputy Commissioner cannot be termed as illegal, without jurisdiction or without lawful authority, hence no case for interference by this Court in its Constitutional jurisdiction is made out, so this petition is dismissed in limine.