ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Crl. Misc.Appln.No.S-49 of 2018.

DATE OF HEARING

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

1. For orders on office objection “A”

2. For Hearing of main case.

09.07.2018.

Mr. Nisar Ahmed Abro, advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Muhammad Afzal Jagirani, Adv: for respondents No.4 to 6

                   Mr. Imtiaz Ali Solangi, A.P.G

                             -.-.-.-.-.-

1. Over-ruled.

                   2. It is alleged by the applicant that on purchase of house when he was raising construction thereupon, the proposed accused demanded from him “Bhatta” with a threat that if it is not paid, then he will have to face the dire consequences. It is further alleged by the applicant that he then approached the police for recording of his FIR,    it was not recorded, he then sought for direction for recording of his FIR by way of filing an application u/s.22-A & B Cr.PC, it was dismissed by learned 5^th Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, Larkana vide his order dated 19.02.2018, which the applicant has impugned before this Court by way of instant Crl.Misc.Application u/s.561-A Cr.PC.      

3.                It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that application of the applicant for recording of his FIR has been dismissed by learned 5^th Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, Larkana, without any justification. By contending so, he sought for direction against the police to record FIR of the applicant, as according to him it is disclosing commission of cognizable offence.

4.                Learned Counsel for the private respondents has sought for dismissal of the instant application by contending that the applicant is intending to involve the private respondents in a false case malafidely only to occupy their property otherwise no incident as alleged by the applicant has taken place. In support of his contention, he relied upon case of Rai Ashraf and others vs. Muhammad Saleem Bhatti and others, which is reported at PLD 2010 SC-691, wherein, the order passed by Hon’ble Lahore High Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction for recording FIR of the applicant was set aside by Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan by making an observation that the application for registration of FIR was filed by the applicant with malafide intention.

5.                Learned A.P.G has supported the impugned order.

6.                 I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

7.                As per the applicant on purchase of the house when he was intending to raise construction thereon, it was prevented by the private respondents by demanding “Bhatta” from him with a threat of dire consequences. The allegation so leveled by the applicant shows that he was disputed with the private respondents over possession and/or purchase of the house. It was civil liability which the applicant apparently was intending to resolve by involving the private respondents in a criminal case under the grab of demand of “Bhatta”.   In these circumstances, learned 5^th Additional Sessions Judge/          Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, Larkana, was right to record dismissal of application of the applicant under section 22-A & B Cr.PC by way of impugned order, which apparently is not calling for any interference by this Court by way of instant application u/s.561-A Cr.PC, it is dismissed accordingly.

J U D G E