ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Crl.Misc.Appln.No.S-68 of 2020

DATE                          ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

For hearing of main case.

20.04.2020.

Mrs. Akhtiar Begum, Advocate for applicants.

Mr. Ghulam Murtaza Jokhio, Advocate for private respondent

Mr.Muhammad Noonari, D.P.G for the State.         

                                                         -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

                        It is alleged that the applicants after having formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object by committing criminal intimidation caused injuries to PWs Kashif Ali and Mohsin Ali and then went away by threatening them of murder, the incident was reported to police, the injureds were referred to hospital yet as per private respondent, the FIR of the incident was not recorded, therefore, he by way of making an application u/s. 22-A & B Cr.PC sought for direction against SHO, P.S, Mahotta, to record his FIR for the above said incident, it was issued by learned 4^th Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-officio Justice of Peace, Larkana, vide his order dated 31.03.2020, which is impugned by the applicants before this Court by way of instant Crl.Misc.Application.

                        It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants being innocent are being involved in a false case by the private respondent on the basis of injuries which constitute non-cognizable offence, under the pretext of criminal intimidation only to satisfy his old dispute with them over the landed property. By contending so, she sought for setting aside of the impugned order.

                        Learned D.P.G for the State did not support the impugned order, while learned counsel for the private respondent supported the same by contending that the offence of criminal intimidation is cognizable one.  In support of his contention, he has relied upon case of Mst.Bhaitan Vs. the State and others (PLD 2005 Karachi-621), which apparently is on distinguishable facts and circumstances.

I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

                        The parties are already disputed over the landed property. The injuries sustained by the injureds are said to be non-cognizable in nature. In that situation, it would be unjustified to order for registration of FIR against the applicants under the pretext of criminal intimidation.

                        In case of Rai Ashraf & others vs. Muhammad Saleem Bhatti & others (PLD 2010 SC-691), the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan has set aside the order whereby the direction for recording of FIR was issued by making an observation that;

“Validity---Dispute between parties was over such house---Applicant had secured restrain, order against respondent from Civil Court, and for its violation, he had a remedy before Civil Court---Applicant had an alternate remedy to file private complaints against respondent---Applicant had filed another application before Ex-officio Justice of Peace/Additional Sessions Judge to restrain public functionaries from taking action against him under Lahore Development Authority Act, 1975, Rules and Regulations framed thereunder---Application for registration of FIR had been filed with malafide intention”.

                        In view of above, the impugned order is set aside with direction to the private respondent to file a direct complaint of the incident before the Court having jurisdiction, if so is advised.

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

J U D G E