ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH,CIRCUIT COURT, HYDERABAD.
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.S.780 of 2014
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.S.781 of 2014
Applicants: (1) Phullan, Fateh Ali, Mohammad Achar and Wazeer through Syed Kamran Ali, Advocate.
Respondents: (1) The State (2) Station House Officer, PS Coal Mines, (3) Deputy Superintendent of Police, Khanoth and (4) Superintendent of Police (H.Q), Jamshoro through Syed Meeral Shah, D.P.G. Sindh.
Complainant: Nazar Hussain through Mr. Imtiaz Ali, advocate.
...........
Date of decision: 14.12.2016.
O R D E R
KHADIM HUSSAIN TUNIO, J: - Through instant applicationfiled under section 561-A, Cr.P.C, the petitioners, namely, Phullan, Fateh Ali, Muhammad Achar and Wazeer Ali seek the quashmentof FIR No. 21 of 2014 under sections 337-A-(ii), 337-F(i), 506(2), 504, 147, 148, 149 PPC registered at Police Station Coal Mines District Jamshoro and F.I.R. No. 22 of 2014 registered against them under sections 506 (2), 337-H (ii), 504, 147, 148, 149 P.P.C. at Police Station Khanoth.Since the parties in the matters are same, both the captioned criminal miscellaneous applications are being disposed of by this single and common order.
2. The relevant facts for the disposal of these applications are as stated herein below:
Brief but relevant facts of the case / FIR bearing No. 21 / 2014 are that on 09.11.2014, the complainant, PWs Muhammad Hashim and Abdul Qadir by caste Khosowere doing labour at Mine No.50. At about 4:30 PM, respondents YousifBachoo, Achar armed with Kalashnikovs, Fateh Ali, Phullan with DBBL gun, Abdullah, Wazeer, Hakeem and Riaz having hatchets in their hands, reached at spot and started abusing and told the petitioners not to come for labour purpose at the Wells of Muhammad Amin Brothers Company; on which petitioners responded that they are employed at the company. As a result of which,Yousif had caused buttblow of Kalashnikov at his right eye, he fell down on the ground. Respondent Bachoo had also caused butt blows of Kalashnikov on the back ofhis left hand. Riaz and Phullan caught him from his legs and pulled his face downwards. He received injuries on his shoulders. Respondents kicked Muhammad Hashim and Abdul Qadir got him rescued by giving God’s sake. After that the respondents went away by saying that if they would come to work at the Wells of Muhammad Amin Brothersnext time, they will be murdered. Then the complainant went to Police Station, obtained letter from the police, got himself examined through doctor, and went to the police station to lodge F.I.R vide Crime No. 21/2014.
Whereas, the facts of F.I.R No.22 of 2014 are that previously, complainant was an employeein Amin Company, wherefrom, he was terminated. On 04.12.2014, he along with Aqil Khan Khoso proceeded to Indus Coal Company on motorcycle in connection with employment/work, wherefrom, they were coming back at about 6:00 PM, when they reached at AndokeDhoro, they saw 6 persons standing at the road and identified them to be Muhammad Achar, Fateh Ali, Phullan with guns, Dildar Ali, Dost Ali and Wazeer Ali with pistols. Out of them,Achar abused, put his gun upon them and asked to stop the vehicle, thereafter, he stopped motorcycle. All the accused persons abused and told that he has been terminated by Amin Companies Officials, therefore, he should not come here. He told them not to abuse and be a gentleman on which Fateh Ali and Phullan pointed their gunsand asked that in future if he comes in the company, they will murder him. Aqil asked the accused not to quarrel for the sake of Almighty Allah. All the respondents fired in the air, in order to cause harassment to them and went away. Then, they came back to their village, narrated the facts to their Nek Mard, Aal Mohammad Khoso, who advised to lodge F.I.R.
3. Mr. Syed Kamran Ali, Learned counsel for the applicants vividly argued that the registration of impugned F.I.RsNo.21 and 22 of 2014 are based on malafide, against the admitted realities and are aimed only to harass,blackmail and pressurize applicants for ulterior motive; that the F.I.Rs are false, fabricated and groundless; that no independent witness cited in the said cases as well as all the witnesses are interested; that F.I.Rs have been lodged with delay; that as per F.I.Rs the complainant and Aqeel Khan are relatives of accused of F.I.Rs. No. 19 and 20 of 2014, PS Coal Mines; that the petitioners and other persons were busy before the superintendent of Sessions Court,Jamshoro at Kotri for furnishing their surety after grant of interim pre-arrest bail in F.I.R No. 21 of 2014 at the time of alleged occurrence;that the applicants have been falsely implicated at the instigation of nominated accused of F.I.Rs. No.19 and 20 of 2014;that Mohammad Amin, the Manager of Mohammad Amin Brothers (PVT) Ltd Lakhra namely, Mohammad Imran Akram, filed C.P No.D-1902 of 2014, before this Court which is pending for adjudication; that no offence whatsoever has been made out and same have been registered in order to harass the applicants.
4. In rebuttal, the learned Deputy Persecutor General, representing the State,opposed the applicants on variety of grounds. He has submitted that the grounds urged by the applicants’ side need full-fledged scrutiny at the trial and applications in the given circumstances are not maintainable and be dismissed accordingly.
5. I have given due attention to the oral submission of both sides and have seen the record.I have decided to refrain from making any observation about the merits of the cases, lest it may prejudice the case of either party during the trial. Suffice it to say at this juncture, the grounds urged here hardly furnish any justification for quashment of the F.I.Rs. in question. Admittedly, the petitioners have been charged for commission of cognizable offences.Record reveals that the complainants had charged the petitioners for commission of a cognizable offence. In cases the contents of the instant applications and that of the F.I.Rs. are put in juxtaposition to each other, it brings the case of the parties within the area of disputed questions of facts and law which cannot be resolved by this Court in the exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under section 561-A Cr.P.C. that requires proper probe, investigation and evidence of the parties, which is absolutely the job of the trial Court.It is relevant to mention here that,stifling and throttling of criminal proceedings has been disapproved by the Honorable superiorCourt.
6. It is a settled law that if, prima facie, an offence has been committed, the ordinary course of trial before the competent Court cannot be allowed to be deflected by resorting to the exercise of inherent jurisdiction of this Court as after taking cognizance of the case by the trial Court, the F.I.Rs. registered in that case, cannot be quashed and fate of the cases and of accused persons challaned therein is to be determined by the trial Court itself,after taking cognizance, if the accused deemed to be innocent or claimed that they had been falsely implicated, they may approach the trial Court by invoking provisions of Section 249-A Cr.P.C or 265-K Cr.P.C instead of approaching this Court under inherent powers. In this respect,reliance can respectfully be placed in the case of ‘Bashir Ahmad v. Zafarul Islam’ (PLD 2004 SC 298),‘Sher Afghan Khan Niazi v. Ali Habbaib and others‘(2011 SCMR 1813), ‘Director General, Anti-Corruption Establishment Lahore and others v. Muhammad Akram Khan and others’(PLD 2013 SC401)and ‘Muhammad Farooque v. Ahmed Nawaz Jagirani and others’ (PLD 2016 SC 55).
7. In the circumstances, I found enough force in the submission of the proceedings that these applications are not maintainable and the same are dismissed accordingly. These are reasons for the short order dated 14.12.2016.
JUDGE