ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

 

C.P No. D- 1742 of 2016.

______________________________________________________________________        DATE                                     ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE ______________________________________________________________________

           

 

1.    For order on CMA 4786/2016 (U/A)

2.    For order on CMA 4787/2016 (Ex)

3.    For katcha Peshi.

4.    For order on CMA 4788/2016 (Stay)

 

 

27.04.2016

 

Mr. Ikhlaq Ahmed Domki, advocate for the petitioner.

 

                                                …….

           

 

             Through instant petition, petitioner has impugned order dated 20.04.2016 passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of peace Ghotki in Cr.Misc. Application No. 911 of 2016, whereby an application filed by respondent No.1 under section 22-A (6) (1) Cr.P.C has been allowed through impugned order with directions to concerned S.H.O to record statement of respondent No.1, if cognizable offence made out then F.I.R be registered.

 

                        Learned counsel for petitioner submits that application under section 22-A B Cr.P.C filed by respondent No.1 contained false and frivolous allegations, whereas infact the complainant party attacked at the house of petitioner and such application under section 22-A B Cr.P.C has also been filed before the same learned Judge, which is pending disposal, whereas on the application filed by respondent No.1, impugned order has been passed which will be misused against the petitioner.

                        We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, perused the record as well as impugned order. It will be advantageous to reproduce the relevant findings of the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of peace, Ghotki, which is self-explanatory on the subject controversy , which reads as follows:

 

           “ It is alleged by applicant in his application that; on 15.4.2016, proposed accused named in application, forcibly entered into his house, caused lathi blows to his brothers Gul Hassan and Ali Hassan on different parts of their bodies and also issued threats of murder to them. Further applicant stated that he approached to S.H.O, P.S. Ubauro, for lodging of F.I.R, but he refused to do so, hence he filed this application.

           Report called from concerned S.H.O, P.S. Ubauro, who reported that letter for medical treatment has been issued.

           Heard learned counsel for applicant, proposed accused Khalid Shah in person, learned DDPP for State and also perused record.

           As per law S.H.O P.S. Ubauro is bound to record the statement of complainant and do according to law, if cognizable offence is made out, therefore, S.H.O ,P.S Ubauro is hereby directed to record the statement of complainant, if from his statement cognizable offence is made out, his F.I.R be registered OR to act in accordance with law. S.H.O, P.S. Ubauro is further directed not to arrest proposed accused till sufficient evidence against them has come on record. If F.I.R of applicant, during investigation declared as false, then proceeding U/S 182 PPC be initiated against applicant.”

 

            From perusal of hereinabove finding recorded by Ex-Officio Justice of peace and keeping in view the scope of provision of section 22-A & B Cr.P.C, we are of the opinion that impugned order does not suffer any error or illegality as no directions have been issued to the concerned S.H.O for registration of F.I.R on the basis of allegations as contained in the application filed by respondent No.1 under section 22-A B Cr.P.C. The learned Justice of peace while exercising his powers vested under section 22-A Cr.P.C has passed a reasonable order, which does not require any interference by this Court. However, keeping in view the apprehension expressed by learned counsel for petitioner regarding misuse of the impugned order, we would dispose of instant petition with directions to the concerned S.H.O that no unnecessary harassment shall be caused to the petitioner, and unless if any cognizable offence has taken place and there is some concrete material available on record to support the allegations as contained in the application under section 22-A Cr.P.C, petitioner may not be implicated in  false criminal case.

                        Instant petition along with listed applications is disposed of in the above terms.

 

                                                           

                                                                        J U D G E

`               

 

Irfan/PA                                                            J U D G E