ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR.

Constt: Petition No.D-        472     of 2016

DATE                         ORDER WITH SIGNAGTURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

 

1-     For orders on CMA.No.1299/2016 (U/A)

2-     For orders on CMA.No.1300/2016 (Ex.A)

3-     For KatchaPeshi.

 

Date of hearing              10th. February, 2016.

                       

                        Mr. Qurban Ali Kalwar, Advocate for petitioner.

 

AQEEL AHMED ABBASI, J:-Through instant petition, the petitioner has impugned order dated 29.1.2016, passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 65/2016 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Hudood)/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, Sukkur, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 22-A & 22-B, Cr.P.C seeking directions for registration of F.I.R against the proposed accused persons, has been dismissed.

2.                     Learned Counsel for the petitioner after having readout the impugned order passed by Ex-Officio Justice of Peace submits that the Ex-Officio Justice of Peace was under legal obligations to issue directions for registration of F.I.R to concerned S.H.O as a cognizable offence was reported by the petitioner. Learned Counsel for the petitioner was directed to refer to the alleged incidence which according to petitioner was a cognizable by police, whereby a cognizable offence was committed by the proposed accusedpersons, in response to which the learned counsel for petitioner referred to an alleged incidence which took place on 25.9.2014, when according to petitioner the Ex-husband of daughter of petitioner namely Imran along with his relatives came at the house of petitioner and maltreated her and her family on account of matrimonial disputeof her daughter and also caused fists blows to her husband, whereafter her husband died. Learned Counsel for petitioner was inquired as to why such matter was not reported to the police when such incidence took place he has candidly stated that since there was compromise going on between the parties, according to which the accused persons had promised, therefore, the F.I.R was not registered.

3.                     We have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused the contents of the application filed under Section 22-A & 22-B, Cr.P.C which reflects that the petitioner has not been vigilant either to lodge an F.I.R of the alleged incidence or even to approach before the Ex-Officio Justice of Peace for such purpose within a reasonable time period, whereas, the alleged incidence took place on 25.9.2014. It appears that the learned Ex-Officio Justice of Peace after conducting preliminary enquiry formed an opinion that in view of some matrimonial dispute between the parties the petitioner has attempted to involve the proposed accused in a false case, hence dismissed the application through impugned order. We may observe that the authorities vested with the Ex-Officio Justice of Peace under Section 22-A& 22-B, Cr.P.C requires him to examine the contents of the complaint brought before him and in case a cognizable offence is reported to issue directions to the concerned S.H.O for recording the statement of the complainant and if cognizable offence is made-out to register the case U/s 154 or 155, Cr.P.C, as the case may be. However, such directions cannot be issued in a mechanical manner on each and every complaint brought before the Ex-Officio Justice of Peace under Section 22-A & 22-B, Cr.P.C, as it will not amount to increase the false and frivolous criminal litigations, but will also increase              scoreless persons to settle their disputes by creating harassment to innocent citizens at the hands of police. We have observed that the tendency of filing frivolous applications under Section 22-A & 22-B, Cr.P.Chas recently increased, whereas orders passed by the Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, directing the S.H.O for recording the statement of complainant and in case of any cognizable offence reported for proceeding in accordance with law, are being misused. In view of herein above facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any error in the impugned order passed by Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, whereas, the petitioner has miserably failed to refer any connecting material which may support the allegations as contained in the application filed under Section 22-A & 22-B, Cr.P.C, and requires interference by this Court under its constitutional jurisdiction. Accordingly, instant petition was dismissed in limine vide our short order dated 10.2.2016 these are the reasons for such short order.

JUDGE

JUDGE

A.R.BROHI