ORDER-SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA  

 

Crl. Misc. Appln. No. S- 66 of 2022.

 

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

 

20.10.2022.

 

1.         For orders on office objections.

2.         For hearing of main case.

 

            Mr. Ayaz Ahmed Faras, Advocate for applicant.           

            Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy Prosecutor General.

            Mr. Nasrullah Solangi, Advocate respondent No.3.

~~~~~~~

 

AMJAD ALI SAHITO, J: Through instant criminal miscellaneous application, applicant Shah Nawaz Channa has impugned an order dated 17.3.2022, passed by  learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge / Justice of Peace, Kandhkot, whereby application filed by respondent No.3 (Sajid Ali) seeking registration of the F.I.R was allowed. Since, the respondent No.3 wanted to register F.I.R against the applicant Shah Nawaz and others, therefore, the applicant has filed these proceedings for setting aside of the impugned order.

 

            2.         Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the respondent No.3, as well as learned D.P.G appearing for the State and perused the record. 

 

            3.         It appears from the record, that respondent No.3 (Sajid Ali) filed an application under Section 22-A & 22-B Cr.P.C before learned Sessions Judge, Kashmore @ Kandhkot, seeking directions to SHO concerned for registration of his F.I.R with regard to abduction of his wife Mst. Parveen Bibi daughter of Ghulam Qadir against proposed accused persons including present applicant Shah Nawaz Channa.

 

            4.         Learned Counsel for the applicant mainly contended that learned Justice of Peace has erred in law and exercised discretion in favor of the respondent No.3. He further added that, respondent No.3 happens to be nephew and son-in-law of the applicant and that the applicant has committed murder of daughter of the applicant by poisoning her and such F.I.R vide Crime No.201/2020 has been registered by applicant Shah Nawaz against respondent No.3 with P.S Kashmore and case is pending trial. Per Learned counsel the respondent No.3 in order to put pressure upon applicant and others and just to save his skin wants to register false F.I.R against applicant and others by presenting false facts. Learned counsel further contended that, alleged abductee Mst. Parveen Bibi was long ago divorced by the respondent No.3 and on the particular date and time she was not in marital bond with the respondent No.3, therefore, the respondent No.3 has no any concern with said lady.

 

            5.         On the other hand learned counsel for respondent No.3 supported the impugned order by contending that it is an speaking and well reasoned order. He further added that, the respondent No.3 has not divorced Mst. Sajida alias Parveen and she is still in marital tie with the respondent No.3, as such according to learned counsel the respondent No.3 is competent and fit person to register the F.I.R. Learned D.P.G. also supported the impugned order. 

 

            6.         Since the matter substantially revolved around the alleged abductee Mst. Parveen, therefore, this Court vide order dated 09.06.2022 directed SSP concerned to produce Mst. Parveen and pursuant to such directions Mst. Parveen, alleged abductee Mst. Sajida alias Parveen Mai holding CNIC No.32403-7014276-8 was produced before this Court on 10.102.2022; her statement was recorded through Deputy Registrar of this Court, in which she stated she was previously married to respondent No.3 (Sajid Ali); however after 3/4 days of the marriage respondent No.3 misbehaved with her and after divorcing ousted her out of his house and thereafter she went to house of her parents at Rajanpur and on completion of “iddat” period she entered into marriage with one Muhammad Jameel. She further stated that she was never abducted by any person and she is happily residing with her husband Muhammad Jameel and want to go back with him.

 

            7.         On last date of hearing i.e. 17.102.2022, Mst. Sajida alias Parveen Mai again appeared and re-iterated the same contentions and it was directed that her mother may be called on next date i.e. 20.102.2022. Today Mst. Sajida alias Parveen Mai is present in Court alongwith one lady claiming to be her mother, who on query disclosed her name to be Sahiba Bibi. Mst. Sahiba Bibi stated that Mst. Sajida alias Parveen Mai is her real daughter from wedlock of her husband, namely, Ghulam Qadir. However, Mst. Sajida alias Parveen Mai while re-iterating same contentions intended to go with her mother, who is present in Court, therefore, she is set at liberty to go with her mother Mst. Sahiba Bibi, who is required to acknowledge a receipt of Mst. Sajida alias Parveen Mai on a plain paper.

 

            8.         Since the star witness i.e. alleged abductee Mst. Sajida alias Parveen Mai has denied her abduction at the hands of proposed accused including present applicant and negated the version of respondent No.3 (Sajid Ali), as such, it would be unnecessary hardship for the applicant and other proposed accused, if the F.I.R is ordered to be registered against them. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 17.3.2022 is hereby set-aside. However, the respondent No.3 would be at liberty to avail remedy as provided under the law, from the relevant forum, if he thinks, that Mst. Sajida alias Parveen Mai is still in marital bond with him.

 

            9.         With above observations, the application in hand stands disposed of.

 

 

                                                       Judge

 

Ansari