RENT CONTROLLER HAS NO POWER U/S 476 CR.P.C.
Sindh High Court
Abdul Rasheed Kalwar, J
Khalil Ahmed VS Moulana Shaikh Muhammad Khalil And 2 OthersConstitutional Petition No, S-461 of 2008
4/3/2009
Reported As [2009 M L D 655]
Result: Petition dismissed
ORDER
' ABDUL RASHEED KALWAR, J. -This constitutional petition filed by the petitioner is for setting aside the order, dated 16-7-2008 passed by the Court of Vth Additional District Judge Karachi East in FRA No,59/07 Khalid Ahmed v. Maulana Shaikh Muhammad as well as the order, dated 2-4-2007 passed by the trial Court i,e, Vth Senior Civil Judge and Rent Controller Karachi East in Rent Case No,755 of 1999 Execution No,1 of 2002 Khalil Ahmed v. Muhammad Sharif.
' The petitioner had moved application under section 476, Cr.P.C. Before the Court of Vth Senior Civil Judge/Rent Controller Karachi East against the respondent No,1 alleging therein that he had committed perjury for making false and frivolous statement during the course of proceedings in Rent Case No,775 of 1999 on 7-2-2003. He had asked the Court to take cognizance of perjury and proceed against respondent on the strength of the provision of law in 476, Cr.P.C. 195, Cr. P . C . And 193, P.P.C. The Rent Controller dismissed this application saying that sections 476, Cr.P.C., 195, Cr.P.C. And 193 P.P.C. Were not applicable.
' The petitioner preferred First Rent Appeal No,59 of 2007 the Court which was dismissed by Vth Additional District Judge Karachi East holding that provisions of section 476, Cr.P.C. Were not applicable to the proceedings in the Court of Rent Controller Finally petitioner preferred this petition/revision. Petitioner has reiterated his grounds mentioned in the petitioner and the contentions raised before the two Courts below, saying that both lower Courts have erred in applying provision of section 476, Cr.P.C. Other relevant section of P.P.C. And Criminal Procedure Code and thereby failed to punish the respondent No,1 for perjury which is very much proved from the material available on record. In support of his contention he has relied on 2001 PCr.LJ 1976 (Abdullah Tang v. Saleem), 1973 Law Notes 548 Lah. (Arad Mumtaz v. Naima Khanum), AIR 1923 Nagar 258. On 15-1-2000 after hearing the petitioner in person and Mr. Saleem Akhtar Additional Prosecutor General this petition was dismissed in limine for the following reasons.
' The petitioner had pressed into service provision of section 476, Cr.P.C., 195 Cr.P.C. And 193 P.P.C. And through his application before the lower Courts. In order to understand the nature of these provisions, same are reproduced as follow:
476. Procedure in cases mentioned in section 195. -(1) When any offences referred to in section 195, subsection (1) clause (b) or clause (c), has been, committed in, or in relation to a proceeding in any civil, revenue or criminal Court, the Court may take cognizance of the offence and try the same in accordance with the procedure prescribed for summary trials in Chapter XXII.
(2) When in any case tried under subsection (1) the Court finds the offender guilty, it may, notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (2) of section 262
(a) pass any sentence on the offender authorized by law for such offence, except a sentence of death, or, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment exceeding five years, if such Court be a High Court, a Court of Session, a District Court or any Court exercising the power of a Court of Session or a District;
(b) sentence the offender to simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months, or to pay a fine not exceeding (one thousand rupees) or both, if such Court be a Court of Magistrate of the first class, a Civil Court other than a High Court, a District Court, or a Court exercising the powers of a District Court or Revenue Court not interior to the Court of Collector;
(c) sentence the offender to simple imprisonment for a term not exceeding one month, or to pay a fine not exceeding fifty rupees or both, if such Court be a Criminal Court or Revenue Court other than a Court referred to in clause (a) or clause (b).
(3) The powers conferred on Civil, Revenue and Criminal Courts under this section may be exercised in respect of any offence referred to in subsection (1) and alleged to have been committed in relation to any proceeding in such Court by the Court to which such former Court is subordinate within the meaning of subsection (3) of section 195.
(4) Any person sentenced by the Court, under this section may, notwithstanding anything hereinbefore contained, appeal:
(a) in the case of a sentence by the High Court, to the Supreme Court;
(b) in case of a sentence by a Court of Sessions or District Court, or a Court exercising the powers of a Court of Session or a District Court, to the High Court, and
(c) in any other case, to the Sessions Judge.
(5) The provisions of Chapter XXXI shall, so far as they are applicable, apply to appeal under this section and the appellate Court may alter the finding or reduce or enhance the sentence appealed against.
' While referring to the provision of section 23 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance it appears that section 480, Cr.P.C. Has been applied, section 476, Cr.P.C. Is not found mentioned in any provision of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance. Section 23 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance is follows:
(23). Judicial Proceedings. -The Controller and the appellate authority shall be deemed to be a Civil Court within the meaning of section 480 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (Act V of 1898).
' After going through provisions of section 23 Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance lets have a glimpse of section 480 which is reproduced:
480. Procedure in certain cases of contempt. -(1) When any such offences as is described in section 175, section 178, section 179, section 180 or section 228 of the Pakistan Penal Code is committed in the view or presence of any Civil, Criminal or Revenue Court, the Court may cause the offender to be detained in custody and at any time before the rising of the Court on the same day may, if it thinks fit, take cognizance of the offence and sentence the offender to fine, not exceeding two hundred rupees, and, in default of payment, to simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month, unless such fine be sooner paid.
' On comparison of sections 480 and 476, Cr.P.C. We will see that section 476 deals with the procedure in cases under section 195 Cr.P.C. Subsection (1) clause (b)(c). The clause (b) of section 195 Cr.P.C. Subsection (1) covers sections 193, 194, 195, 196, 199, 200, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 228, P.P.C. The clause (c) of subsection (1) of section 195 Cr.P.C. Pertains to sections 463, 471, 475, 476, P.P.C.
