ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

C.  P.  No.S-37    of   2016.

DATE OF HEARING

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

15.01.2016.                

1. For orders on office objection.

2. For orders on M.A.No.122/2016.

3. For Katcha Peshi.

Mr. Saeed Ahmed Shahani, advocate for the petitioner.

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

ABDUL MALIK GADDI, J.-           Petitioner Noor Muhammad Shaikh has filed this Constitutional Petition directly before this Court with the following prayers :-

(a) That, this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to direct respondents No.1 & 2 not to cause harassment to the petitioner party and not to issue threats of implicating them in series of false criminal cases at the instance of respondents No.5 to 10.

(b) To call and direct respondents No.1, 2 and 5 to 10 to appear before this Hon’ble Court and to file undertakings that they will not cause any sort of harassment to the petitioner and his family members.

(c) To direct official respondents to provide full legal protection to the lives and property of the petitioner party in accordance with law as petitioner and his family members apprehend great danger to their lives at the hands of respondents No.5 to 10.

            2.         Office has raised objection with regard to maintainability of this petition directly before this Court without exhausting his remedy available to the petitioner by approaching the learned Sessions Judge/Justice of Peace in the first instance. 

            3.         Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner insists for issuing notice to the private respondents No.5 to 10.  He was called upon to satisfy the Court as to how the writ shall lie against private persons, to which he could not furnish any satisfactory explanation.  He, however, contends that the respondents No.5 to 10 have extended threats of murder to the petitioner, therefore, life of the petitioner is in great danger.  In this regard, it may be mentioned here that the petitioner has remedy of approaching the concerned police for registration of FIR/complaint against the private respondents.  In case such complaint/FIR is refused by the police, the petitioner has to approach the learned Sessions Judge/Justice of Peace concerned. 

            4.         However, so far official respondents/police officials are concerned, they are bound to act strictly in accordance with law, for which orders of the Court are not necessary.  It may further be clarified here that it is well-settled principle of law that when there are concurrent jurisdiction of the two Courts, the Court of first instance in the present case i.e. the Sessions Judge/ex-Officio Justice of Peace is to be approached first. 

            5.         In view of above facts and circumstances of the case, this petition is disposed of with direction to the petitioner to approach the learned Sessions Judge/ex-Officio Justice of Peace for redressal of his grievance, if any. 

            6.         Petition stands disposed of in the above terms alongwith listed applications.    

                                                                                                                        JUDGE