ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

C.P.No. D-686 of 2009

Date	Order with signature of Judge

1. For orders on Misc. No.5728/09 (Intervener)

2. For Katcha Peshi

3. For hearing of Misc. No.3040/09 (stay)

--------------

(statement as flagged by R.3 dated 30/4/09)

22.4.2010 M/s Abdul Sattar Pirzada and Rana Ikramullah, advocates for the petitioner

Mr. Shafi Muhammad Memon,AAG along with S.P. Investigation.

-------------

Through these proceedings, the petitioner seeks cancellation of the FIR. In all there are three FIRS, which were filed against the petitioner and others. The S.P. Investigation states that FIR No.152/2009 of P.S. K. N. Shah, District Dadu, under section 324, 353, 427,148, 149 P.P.C. has been recommended for disposal in ‘A’ class and the concerned Magistrate lby order dated 13.5.2009 has accepted the police report.

The S.P. Investigation further states that in the FIR No.157/2009 of P.S. K.N. Shah, District Dadu, under section 506/2, 147, 148, 149, 504 P.P.C. the police has recommended the disposal of the case in ‘B’ class and by order dated 13.5.2009 the concerned Magistrate has accepted the police report. According to the S.P. Investigation there remains only FIR No.38/2009 of P.S. Faridabad, Taluka Mehar, District Dadu, under section 324, 147 and 502 P.P.C., which was lodged at the instance of a private complainant, namely, Sikandar Khoohavo. The challan was submitted by the police and the matter is pending before the Ist A.D.J. in which the petitioner has been granted bail. He stated that against these proceedings, an application under section 265-K, Cr. P.C. was made by the petitioner before the trial court, which was dismissed and against the dismissal of the application criminal miscellaneous application bearing No.217/2009 for quashment of the proceedings has been filed by the petitioner in this court, which is pending adjudication. According to the S.P. Investigation, there is no FIR against the petitioner (s) and it is only one FIR against which the petitioner has availed the remedy by approaching this Court for quashment.

In view of this position, this petition has become infructuous and stands disposed of as such along with the listed applications. If there is any apprehension of the petitioner, he may approach this court in the quashment proceedings.

JUDGE