ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA
Crl.Misc.Appln.No.S-251 of 2018.
Date of hearing |
Order with signature of Judge |
For hearing of main case.
17.12.2018.
Mr.Mohsin Ali Khan Pathan, Advocate for the applicants. Mr.Athar Abbas Solangi, Advocate for private respondent.
Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, A.P.G for the State.
~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~
The applicants by way of Crl.Misc.Applicatoin u/s 561-A Cr.PC have impugned an order dated 29.09.2018, passed by learned Civil/Family Judge & Judicial Magistrate, Kashmore @ Kandhkot, whereby he has declined to accept police report u/s 173 Cr.PC for cancellation of FIR No.141/2018, under section 220, 452, 395, 147, 148, 149 PPC of P.S A-Section Kandhkot, under false “B” class, with the following observation;
“The record reveals that after further investigation PWs in their statements u/s 162 Cr.PC have fully supported the FIR with regard to time, date, place and manner of commission of alleged offence. The PWs also got recorded their statements u/s 164 Cr.PC before this Court in which they have also fully supported the case, but I.O merely on the basis of statement of DWs have recommended the disposal of the case under “B” class. It is settled principle that ipso dexi of police is not binding upon the Court. Hence, being disagreed with the opinion of police I am of the humble view that prima facie the case against accused nominated in the case is made out and there is sufficient evidence against them to take cognizance”.
The facts in brief necessary for disposal of instant Crl.Misc.Application are that the applicants with rest of the culprits allegedly by committing trespass into the house of private respondent Khadim Hussain take away therefrom his belongings, as are detailed in his FIR and his sons Imdad Ali and Mukhtiar Ali, without any lawful justification in excess of their powers being police officials and then involved them in a false cases at P.S A-Section Kandhkot, for that the present case was registered.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that they being innocent have been involved in this case falsely by the private respondent, as they may not discharge their lawful duty as public servants and learned trial Magistrate has taken the cognizance of the incident without lawful justification. By contending so, he sought for reversal of the impugned order with quashment of the entire proceedings.
Learned A.P.G for the State and learned for the private respondent have sought for dismissal of the instant Crl.Misc.Application by contending that the challan of the case against the applicants has already been submitted before the Court having jurisdiction and case is ripe for trial.
I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.
Admittedly, the challan of the case has already been submitted and the case is ripe for trial. In that situation, it would be hard to reverse the impugned order and/or direct quashment of the proceedings by discussing the merits of the case, which are not called for at this stage. If the applicants are having a feeling that they have been involved in this case falsely by the private respondent and there is no probability or possibility of their conviction, then they could seek their pre-mature acquittal by way of filing such application before learned trial Court. In case, such application is filed by the applicants then the same it is expected would be disposed of by learned trial Court strictly in accordance with law, within shortest possible time.
The instant Crl.Misc.Applicatoin is disposed of accordingly.
JUDGE --