'Brief facts of the case are that there was a dispute regarding the management of the affairs of Pakistan Transport Co., Mang between Mian Muhammad Siddiq Shafi petitioner and Mian Muhammad Hussain, his uncle.
' The latter had moved an application for the liquidation of the Company in the High Court. A liquidator was appointed by the High Court and Zulfiqar Ali Khan worked as a cashier of the Company. On 27-8-68 Mien Muhammad Shafi petitioner and Abdul Hameed co-accused alongwith four others came to the office of the cashier Zulfiqar Ali Khan and asked him to hand over the charge to them as they had brought an order for the same from the High Court. The accused accordingly took into possession some vouchers and also the possession of the office. On the following day when Zulfiqar All Khan complainant went to the office he found Abdul Hameed co-accused sitting on his chair and working as cashier. On inquiry he was told that be was working under the orders of High Court. The complainant then informed Agha Shujaat Ali, the liquidator, who called Muhammad Siddiq Shafi petitioner to show him the relevant order, but he did not go to him. The liquidator advised Zulfiqar All Khan complainant to continue with his work. It is alleged that after some time the petitioner and Abdul Majid co-accused came to his o and forcibly turned him out of his office.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that the case against the petitioner and others is without sting any more. The matter was compromised and the complainant has since died. Whatever happened in year 1966 was never carried further by any of the parties and the matter reported was the result of high feelings which existed at that time between the parties. He has also referred to the delay of t wo days which took place before the the F. I. R. Was lodged with the police.
3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has submitted that he has not much to say in this case except that a prima facie case stood made out against the petitioner under section 384/342/452, P. P. C. And the same should take its course for final adjudication.
4. I have given my anxious consideration to the contentions raised by both the parties in this case and find that when the dispute which culminated in these criminal proceedings itself has been resolved between the petitioner and his uncle before this Court, it would be nothing but flogging a dead horse if the proceedings are allowed to stay alive. This petty matter has taken eleven years of valuable life of the parties and no useful purpose will be served if the proceedings are allowed to continue when the complainant himself is no more alive to pursue his grievance. The result is that I accept the quashment petition and quash the proceedings pending against the petitioner as well as his other co-accused before the trial Court.