ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

C.P.    No.496  of  2011.

DATE OF HEARING

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

1. For orders on office objection Flag ‘A’.

2. For Katcha Peshi.

16.03.2011

Miss Rubina Dhamrah advocate for petitioner.

Mr. Altaf Hussain Surahiyo, State Counsel a/w Inspector Ghulam Hussain Chandio, Addl. SHO PS Market, PSI Akhtar Hussain Burdi on behalf of DPO Larkana, SIP Imam Bux Mithani SIO Market PS and HC Badlo Khan of Market PS.

                                                                        -.-.-.-.-.-.-

                        Through instant petition, the petitioner has complained about the highhandedness of the police officials, who as per allegations raided the house of the petitioner and arrested one Zahid Ali. It has been further alleged that an amount of Rs.50,000/- was demanded by the police for the release of petitioner’s cousin Zahid Ali.

                        Notices were issued to the respondents, pursuant to which they have filed their statements along with annexures, wherein all the allegations have been specifically denied. It has been further intimated that Zahid Ali is required in Crime No.235/2008 registered at Police Station Market, who was declared as proclaimed offender and was arrested and produced before the competent Court. It is further intimated that brothers of Zahid Ali are also involved in the murder of advocate, whose cases are pending before the competent Court of law. Learned State Counsel submitted that the instant petition is false and frivolous and has been filed to protect the accused nominated in the above mentioned FIR from the clutches of law, hence is liable to be dismissed.

            Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that Zahid Ali is not the same person who is required in Crime No.235/2008, as according to her even his father’s name has not been mentioned in FIR. To this submission, learned State Counsel submitted that father’s name of the accused has been mentioned in the supplementary challan. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that she will be satisfied if the petitioner is allowed to approach before the superior officers of the police for the purposes of reinvestigation of the matter, as according to her Zahid Ali has been falsely implicated in the instant crime.

                        Petitioner is at liberty to approach any proper forum including the police officials in terms of Police Order 2002 or before the learned trial Court seeking appropriate relief, under the facts and circumstances of the case, redressal of his grievance.

                        In view of hereinabove facts no interference is required by this Court at this stage. Accordingly, instant petition stands disposed off.

Judge