ORDER   SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Crl.Revision.Appln.No.S-66 of 2020.

_________________________________________________________________

DATE                                       ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

_________________________________________________________________

01. For orders on office objection “A”.

02. For orders on M.A.No.5468/2021 (E/A).

03. For hearing of main case.

29.10.2021

                        Mr. Habibullah Ghouri, Advocate for applicant.

                        Mr. Mazhar Ali Mangan, Advocate for the complainant.

                        Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Addl.P.G for the State.

                        =  *  = * = * = * = * =

IRSHAD ALI SHAH - J;- The applicant by preferring the instant criminal revision application has impugned order dated 05.12.2020, passed by learned                  1^st Additional Sessions Judge/MCTC, Larkana, whereby his application for reinvestigation of case against him was dismissed.

                        It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has falsely been involved in a murder case by the complainant party, therefore, the reinvestigation of case is necessary to prove his innocence. By contending so, he sought for setting aside of the impugned order with direction to police to reinvestigate the case, to prove innocence of the applicant.

                        Learned Addl.P.G for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have sought for dismissal of instant criminal revision application by contending that the applicant is fully implicated in commission of the incident and he now is intending to defeat the trial under the garb of re-investigation.

                        I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

                        The applicant has been nominated by the complainant in his FIR as one of the accused, responsible for committing murder of his brother Imdad Ali and that FIR after due investigation was challaned by the police before the Magistrate having jurisdiction. After commission of the incident, instead of joining the investigation/trial, the applicant preferred to go in absconsion for considerable period and on arrest now is seeking for reinvestigation of the case against him under the pretext that he being innocent has been involved in his case by the complainant falsely. If the applicant is having a feeling that he is innocent and involved in his case by the complainant falsely, then he can prove his innocence adequately before learned trial Court. The reinvestigation of the case in the circumstances is not called for absolutely.

                        In case of Bahadur Khan Vs. Muhammad Azam and 02 others (2006 SCMR-373), it has been observed by the Honourable Apex Court that;

 “This Court in the case of Riaz Hussain and another v. The State while, 1986 SCMR-1934 seizen of the case relating to criminal appeal has held that the system of reinvestigation in criminal cases is a recent innovation which is always taken up at the instance of influential people and favourable reports obtained which in no way assist the Courts in coming to a correct conclusion, had created more complications to the Court administering the justice, therefore, expressed its disapproval of this system altogether and; successive investigation of the case, as rightly observed by the learned High Court that it only retards the administration of justice instead of providing any assistance thereto”.

                        Consequent upon above discussion, the instant criminal revision application is dismissed together with listed application.

 J U D G E