IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT,

LARKANA

Crl. Misc. Appln. No. S-  138 of 2023.

Ashique Hussain Kalhoro.                                                      ……...…....…….Applicant.

Versus

SHO, P.S Waleed and others.                                                ….......…...….Respondents.

            Applicant-in-person. 

            Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy Prosecutor General.

Date of hearing:          22.05.2023.

Date of order:             22.05.2023.

ORDER

Zulfiqar Ali Sangi, J-.    Through captioned Criminal Miscellaneous Application, applicant Ashique Hussain Kalhoro has assailed the order dated 18.04.2023 passed by the learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana, in capacity of Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, whereby an application filed by the applicant seeking directions to register his FIR against the proposed accused, was dismissed.

            The applicant submitted that learned Justice of Peace has erred in law and exercised discretion in favor of the proposed accused. He further added that the contents of application filed by the applicant under Section 22-A & 22-B Cr.P.C, prima-facie discloses the commission of a cognizable offence and as per provisions of Section 154 Cr.P.C the Officer Incharge of the Police station is required and bound to register F.I.R and he has no power to refuse. Lastly, he prayed that his application may be allowed and respondent No.1 may be directed to record his statement.

            Perusal of the impugned order reflects that the learned Ex-Officio/ Justice of Peace called report from Incharge of District Complaint and Redressal Cell Larkana, who reported that no such incident has taken place and the applicant has filed application with false facts. Perusal of impugned order further reflects that, it seems that the parties exchanged harsh words with each other and no offence of robbery had taken place. At that, the applicant has not named any accused of the purported robbery and, therefore, the allegation that the police arrested them and affected recovery does not appeal to reason.

            Since, version of applicant has been negated by the concerned police with regard to happening of the alleged incident in a fashion as disclosed by the applicant in his application. In these circumstances, when concerned police has already negated and denied the version of the applicant, what would be expected from them, if the F.I.R of the applicant is registered, as such proper course for the applicant would be that of availing adequate remedy in shape of direct complaint.

            The impugned order appears to be well reasoned and speaking and lacks any illegality and infirmity therein; as such it does not call for any interference by this Court. Consequently, the captioned criminal miscellaneous application being merit-less stands dismissed.

                                                Judge

Ansari