ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA.

Constt: Pett: No:     331 of 2011.

Date                          Order with signature of judge.

            1.         For orders on office objection as flag A.

            2.         For Katcha Peshi.                                                  

25.02.2011.

                        Mr. Nisar Ahmed G. Abro, advocate for the petitioner.

                        Mr. Ali Raza Pathan, State Counsel  alongwith  SPO  Sultan Kot Insp.Sagheer Ahmed Mugheri, SIP Sugheer Bhayo, SHO P.S Sultan Kot , SIP Imran Bhayo, SHO P.S  Gaheja,  SIP Ayz Shah, SHO Jamalpur P.S,  SIP  Ghulam Raza Ujjan, SHO P.S Jabbar Shaikh, HC Khaliq Panhwar, P.S Tajodero, HC Nadir Shah,  P.S Jabbar Shaikh and HC Deedar Abro, P.S Madeji.

========

                        Pursuant  to court notices, the official respondents have filed their comments alongwith annexures, copy whereof  has been  supplied to the learned counsel for the petitioner. 

                        From the perusal of the comments, it has been transpired  that there are several criminal cases against inhabitants of the village of the petitioner whereas there is no case against the present petitioner.    SPO Sagheer Ahmed Mugheri  present alongwith other  respondents, stated  that  the allegations as contained in petition are false and  frivolous  as  no such incident has  taken place.  He further stated  that  as a matter of fact the co-villagers of the petitioner  are nominated  as accused in several criminal cases as detailed in comments filed, whereas, instant petitioner on their behest, is attempting to save such accused persons from legal process by filing  frivolous proceedings.  The SIP Ayaz Ali, the concerned SHO P.S Jabbar Shaikh,  is also  present in Court  and stated  that,   on the complaint of one of the abductee, for alleged   abduction of another person belonging to Khairpur,  the police party  is making efforts o arrest the accused  persons and to recover the abductee.  However, he also denies   the alleged raid into the houses of the petitioner. 

                        In view of contradictory statements of both the parties, it appears that there are two  counter versions  of the  parties   which can not be examined by this Court in its constitutional jurisdiction.  However, looking at the nature of allegations  as against the police officials, it would be appropriate  if an impartial inquiry is conducted into the allegations as  contained in the petition.

             Accordingly, the instant  petition is disposed of with directions to DPO Shikarpur to conduct  impartial inquiry into the allegations  contained in the instant petition  against  the police officials  mentioned therein and submit compliance report  through  Additional Registrar of this Court within 15 days.  If after   inquiry  the allegations   against the police officials  are found to be correct, action  in terms of Police Order 2002 may be taken against such delinquent police officials.

JUDGE