ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

 

C.P No. D- 3354 of 2014.

______________________________________________________________________        DATE                                     ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE ______________________________________________________________________

           

For katcha Peshi.

(Counsel for petitioner not filed amended tile as per Court order

dated 06.07.2015 & notice not issued to newly added proposed accused)

 

                                                            Present:

                                                            Mr.Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbassi &

                                                            Mr.Justice Ghulam Qadir Leghari.

 

 

 

Date of hearing: 17.02.2016

 

Mr.Ghulam Murtaza Memon, Advocate for petitioner.

Mr. Sajjad Ahmed Zangejo  Advocate for proposed accused.

Mr. Shafique Ahmed Leghari, State Counsel.

 

           

                                    O R D E R

 

 

Aqeel Ahmed Abbassi J.  Through instant petition, petitioner has impugned order dated 24.05.2014 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Hudood)/   
Ex-Officio Justice of peace, Sukkur, in Cr.Misc. Application No. 492 of 2014, whereby an application filed by petitioner under section 22-A (6) (1) Cr.P.C seeking directions for registration of F.I.R against proposed accused, has been dismissed.

 

                        Learned counsel for applicant submits that the impugned order passed by Justice of peace  is liable to be set aside, as the Justice of peace was under obligation to direct the concerned S.H.O to register F.I.R against proposed accused persons for the offences stated in the application under section
22-A Cr.P.C.

 

                        Notices were issued, pursuant to which Mr. Sajjad Muhammad Zangejo Advocate filed Vakalatnama on behalf of proposed accused and raised an objection with regard to maintainability of instant petition on the ground that the impugned order does not suffer from any error or illegality as no cognizable offence was committed by the proposed accused persons. On the contrary the petitioner on account of admitted enmity filed frivolous application under section 22-A Cr.P.C which has rightly been dismissed by the Justice of peace through impugned order. Learned counsel further submits that earlier an F.I.R was got registered by the husband  of petitioner in respect of same alleged offence which was disposed of in ‘B’ Class, whereas petitioner also got registered another F.I.R bearing No.85/2013 against the proposed accused which has also been disposed of in ‘B’ Class. It has been prayed that the instant petition may be dismissed with costs.

 

                        We have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the record and impugned order passed by Justice of Peace in the instant case. It will be advantageous to reproduce the relevant findings of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Hudood)/Ex-Officio Justice of peace, Sukkur, which is self-explanatory on the subject controversy , which reads as follows:

 

           “Since from perusal of record as well as report of S.H.O police station ‘B’ Section Sukkur, it reveals that he in his report has reported that prior to this application one Mailap Mal, the husband of applicant had lodged F.I.R bearing crime No.73/2012 under section 337-F(i), 506(2) PPC P.S. Sorah, District Khairpur, against the proposed accused, same was disposed of under “B” Class, such Karwai No.01/2012 U/S 211, 182 PPC submitted by the I.O before the Court of law, thereafter applicant Sata Bai has also got registered her F.I.R bearing crime No.85/2013 under section 354-A, 452, 506(2) PPC on the above said P.S, same was also disposed of under “B” Class, thereafter, applicant also approached to Honourable High Court of Sindh, Sukkur and then she appeared before this Court. The S.H.O further reported in his report that there is dispute going on between both parties over a plot, no any offence has been taken place, it is crystal clear that applicant in order to take revenge from the proposed accused, wants to drag them only to put pressure, harass, humiliate upon the proposed accused, as there is civil nature dispute in between the applicant and the proposed accused over a plot and applicant concocted false story wants to involve in a criminal case, hence, application in hand is meritless, same is dismissed accordingly. I have been benefited from below case laws of Honourable Superior Courts viz. 2013 YLR page 581(Sindh), 2013 P.Cr.L.J 553, PLD 2005 Karachi Page 621, MLD 2008 PAGE 1142, P.Cr.L.J 2009 page 138, P.Cr.L.J 2009 page 374 and P.Cr.L.J 2009 page 387, 2008 YLR 2301(Lahore), 2013 P.Cr.L.J page 117 Placitum ‘a’ & ‘c’, 2012 P.Cr.L.J page 180”.

 

            From perusal of hereinabove, it appears that petitioner intends to falsely implicate the proposed accused persons in an offence, which prima facie is not cognizable by the police, whereas, the petitioner has already sought remedy before the appropriate forum. However, having failed to achieve desired results, filed frivolous application before Justice of peace under section 22-A Cr.P.C, which has rightly been dismissed through impugned order. We may observe that the authority vested in Justice of peace under section 22-A Cr.P.C requires him to examine the allegations with due care and if it attracts to his prudent mind that a cognizable offence has been committed, only then such directions can be issued to the concerned S.H.O for recording statement of the complainant under section 154 or 155 Cr.P.C, as the case may be, whereas, Justice of peace is not required to issue directions for registration of F.I.R on each complaint in a mechanical manner, without applying his judicious mind to the facts of the case. We do not find any merit in the instant petition, whereas, no material whatsoever has been placed on record to support the allegations as contained in the application filed under section 22-A Cr.P.C. Moreover the petitioner was at liberty to file direct complaint in respect of alleged offence shown in the application under section 22-A Cr.P.C which appears to have not been availed by the petitioner in the instant case. Accordingly, instant petition was dismissed vide our short order dated 17.02.2015 and above are reasons of such short order.

 

                                                           

                                                                        J U D G E

`               

 

Irfan/PA                                                            J U D G E