ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Crl.Misc.Appln. No.S-407 of 2017.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

1. For hearing of case

2. For hearing of M.A.No.4386/2017.

12.11.2018.

                        Mr.Abdul Rehman Bhutto, Advocate for the applicant.                             Mr.Raja Imtiaz Ali Solangi, A.P.G.

~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- The applicant by way of making an application u/s 22-A& B (6)(iii) Cr.PC, sought for the following relief;             

A).       That this Honourable Court may be pleased to call the respondents No.1 to 8 in person before this Honourable Court and restrain them from causing illegal and unlawful harassment to the petitioner and execute such P.R bond/statement from them.

B).       To direct respondent No.9 to provide legal protection to the petitioner.

C).       Any other relief which this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.

                        The learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, Kandhkot, on 15.12.2017, disposed of said application of the applicant with the following observation;

“I am of the humble view that the petitioner is remained failed to prove his petition in his favour, hence the prayer of the petitioner is hereby rejected. However respondent No.3 Nizamuddin is directed to appear before the SHO/Duty officer of police station A. Section Kandhkot and record his statement and in case his narration discloses the commission of cognizable offence then SHO/duty officer is directed to register his FIR”.  

                        It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, Kandhkot, has passed the impugned order in excess of his jurisdiction, which was not asked for by anyone. By contending so, he sought for reversal of the impugned order.

                        Learned A.P.G did not support the impugned order.

                        I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

                        It was the simple application whereby the applicant sought for protection from harassment of the police allegedly at the hands of private respondent. If learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, Kandhkot, formed his opinion that the applicant was not able to make out his case for his protection from the alleged harassment, then he ought to have dismissed the application of the applicant by very simple order. It was not done by learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, Kandhkot, without any cogent reason and he then directed the police to record FIR against the applicant, which in face of it was a novel exercise. In that situation, it is rightly being contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the order impugned has been passed by learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, Kandhkot, in excess of his jurisdiction. It is set aside.

                        The instant Crl.Misc.Application is disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE

.