IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Misc. Application No.S-133 of 2022

Applicant: Amanullah Gopang through Mr. Abdul Wahab G. Shaikh, Advocate.

Date of hearing: 14.03.2022

Date of decision: 14.03.2022

O R D E R

Zulfiqar Ali Sangi, J: Through this application, the applicant has assailed the order dated 04.03.2022, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, Ubauro, whereby an application under Section 22-A(6)(i) Cr.P.C, filed by the Respondent No.3, was allowed.

2. Learned Counsel for the Applicant, at the very outset, submits that learned trial Court has erred while passing the impugned order as there is dispute between the applicant and proposed accused on some matrimonial affairs; besides on landed property and in this regard a sale agreement has also been executed; that story narrated in the contents of application under Section 22-A(6)(i) Cr.P.C filed by the Respondent No.3 appears to be false and forged one, hence impugned order has been passed in a hasty manner without considering the actual facts and is liable to be set-aside.

3. I have heard the learned Counsel for the Applicant and carefully perused the crucial contents of the impugned order.

4. From the perusal of impugned order, it reflects that learned ex-Officio Justice of Peace, after calling reports and record from the concerned police, has passed a detailed order and reasons for allowing the application of Respondent No.3 are mentioned in paragraph-5 of the impugned order, which reads as under:-

“I have heard both sides and perused the record. I have also gone through report of DSP Complaint Redressal Center, Ghotki which reveals that the offence is made out. It has also been reported that the SHO PS Khambra has been directed to lodge FIR against the proposed accused on appearance of applicant/victim. The allegations leveled in the petition against the proposed accused need to be investigated properly after recording statement of the Petitioner under Section 154 Cr.P.C. Therefore, SHO P.S Khambra is directed to record statement of the petitioner and if any cognizable offence is made out, then he shall lodge FIR. If during investigation, the allegations are found false, then appropriate legal action may be taken against the petitioner/complainant of this case. The petition stands disposed of accordingly.”

5. As regard to the contention of learned Counsel for the Applicant that learned Justice of Peace after the reports submitted by police cannot pass the order for registration of FIR has no force as the Ex-Officio Justice of Peace has to apply his judicial mind and if from the material available before him, he is of the view that the case for issuance of direction is made out or not then he is competent to allow the application or dismiss it.

6. Learned Counsel for the Applicant has failed to point out any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order, which, in my view, is well-reasoned and does not require any interference by this Court. Resultantly, this application is dismissed in limine.

JUDGE

Faisal Mumtaz/PS