IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Criminal Revision Application No.S-53 of 2015

Applicant: Muhammad Ameen Arain, in person.

Respondent No.3: Mazhar Hussain Hisbani

Through Mr. Dareshani Ali Haider Ada, advocate

State: Mr. Khalil Ahmed Matelo, DPG

Date of hearing: 14.03.2022.

Date of decision: 14.03.2022.

O R D E R

Zulfiqar Ali Sangi, J: Through this Cr. Revision Application, the Applicant has assailed order dated 07.05.2015 (impugned herein) passed by learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption (Provincial) Sukkur, whereby an application filed under Section 193 Cr.P.C for joining of Respondent No.3 as an accused was dismissed, hence this application.

2. Applicant, present in person, submitted that there was material against the Respondent No.3 before the trial Court; however the same has not been considered while passing the impugned order.

3. Learned Counsel representing the Respondent No.3 submitted that there is no material against the Respondent, therefore, learned trial court has rightly passed the impugned order, which requires no interference.

4. Learned DPG also not supported the impugned order.

5. I have heard applicant in person, learned Counsel for respondent No.3 and learned DPG as well and perused the record with their able assistance. I have also scanned the entire order, wherein learned trial Court, while dismissing the application filed under Section 193 Cr.P.C, has observed as under:-

“After hearing arguments of learned advocate of both the parties. I have perused R&Ps of case. In respect of same incident complainant Muhammad Ameen had filed a private complaint Sessions Case No.84 of 2007 re-Muhammad Ameen vs. Mazhar Hussain and two others under Section 220, 344 PPC 156 Police Order 2002 in which present accused is acquitted by learned Sessions Judge, Naushahro Feroze vide judgment dated 25.02.2010. From perusal of evidence of complainant, it appears that there is no direct evidence against accused Mazhar Hussain, and his name does not appear in FIR. Neither accused Mazhar Hussain has received bribe nor accepted it therefore present application merits no consideration and police has rightly let of accused Mazhar Hussain. Consequently, I dismiss application.”

6. The FIR bearing Crime No.05 of 2005 has also been scanned minutely. No any allegation against the Respondent No.3 is mentioned in the FIR nor even in the deposition of the applicant. There is no direct role of Respondent No.3, which may connect him with the commission of any offence. Perusal of record further reveals that, on indistinguishable facts, applicant already filed a direct complaint wherein Respondent No.3 along with other accused persons were acquitted against that order, an acquittal appeal was also preferred before this Court, which was thereafter withdrawn.

7. In view of the above circumstances, no illegality or infirmity has been seen in the impugned order. Resultantly, this application is dismissed.

Judge

Faisal Mumtaz/PS