O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA
Const. Petition No.S- 100 of 2011
|
Date |
Order with signature of the Judge |
08.3.2011
Mr. Sarfraz Khan Jatoi, advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Abdul Hamid Bhurgri, Addl. A.G & Mr.Ali Raza Pathan, State counsel.
Mr. Safdar Ali G. Bhutto, Advocate for proposed accused.
---------
Through instant petition the petitioner has complained about non registration of an F.I.R by police in view of allegations contained in the instant petition. Notices were issued to the respondents, pursuant to which, official respondents have filed their comments. Today respondent No.2 and the counsel for the proposed accused have filed comments, copies supplied to the learned counsel for the petitioner.
The allegations contained in the petition have been denied by the official respondents which, as per comments, appears to be dispute between private parties, whereas, it has been further stated, that the petitioner never approached them for registration of F.I.R.
Learned counsel for the proposed accused has vehemently opposed the maintainability of instant petition on the ground that neither petitioner has approached the concerned police or invoked the provisions of Section 22-A & 22-B, Cr.P.C for the purpose of registration of F.I.R nor any cognizable offence has been alleged or made out even in the instant petition. Per learned counsel, proposed accused are the owners of the subject property whereas the petitioner is claiming to be Hari’s on the subject land and has no locus standi to file instant petition. Per learned counsel, no such incident as alleged in the petition has ever taken place. He further stated that a civil suit in respect of the same subject matter was also filed by the same petitioner which has been dismissed under Order 7 Rule 11, C.P.C, which fact has been concealed by the petitioner.
Learned Additional A.G also opposed the maintainability of the instant petition in view of the hereinabove facts.
In response to above submission of learned counsel for proposed accused, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that it is a right of every citizen to approach the appropriate forum for the redressal of his grievance in accordance with law. However, learned counsel submitted that, he will be satisfied if directions are issued to the concerned SHO to record the statement of the petitioner and if a cognizable offence is made out to proceed in accordance with law.
Accordingly, without commenting at the veracity of the allegations contained in the instant petition, instant petition is disposed of with the direction to the petitioner to approach the concerned SHO who shall record the statement of the petitioner, and if a cognizable offence is made out shall proceed in accordance with law.
Matter stands disposed of in above terms.
Judge