ORDER-SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Constt. Petition No. S- 948 of 2018.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

28.12.2018.

1. For orders on office objections.

2. For hearing of main case.

Mr. Irfan Haider Jamali, Advocate for petitioner.

Mr. Munawar Ali Abbasi, Asstt. A.G.

~~~~~~~

Through instant petition, the petitioner has approached this Court with following prayer(s):

(a) To issue a writ, directing the D.I.G police, Larkana, to conduct fair and impartial inquiry into the matter and ensure return of aforementioned looted valuables viz. three DBBL licensed guns, two motorcycles, six tolla gold ornaments, cash Rs.1,40,000/-, two sac of urea and wheat seeds weighing 50 kilograms to the petitioner.

(b) To issue a writ of prohibition restraining the respondents No.1 to 4 from creating harassment for the petitioner and direct the respondent No.5 to ensure proper protection to the life, liberty, property and family members of the petitioner and save him from the harassment, which is being caused to him by the official respondents No.1 to 4.

(d) To direct the respondents No.3 and 4 to submit their affidavit sin respect of causing no more harassment for the petitioner in future.

Mr. Irfan Haider Jamali, learned counsel for petitioner has contended that petitioner is involved in F.I.R No.71/2012, registered under Sections 302, 324 P.P.C of P.S Saddar and F.I.R No.02/2013 under Sections 337-H (2), 148, 149 P.P.C of P.S Mouladad; that in both the cases petitioner is on bail. He further states that police in connivance with the other parties have registered seven other F.I.Rs against family members of petitioner at P.S Mouladad and P.S Saddar with malafide intention in order pressurize the petitioner to bow before the police officials for their unnecessary demands; that the aforesaid act of the police officials is highly uncalled for. He further contended that life and liberty of the petitioner is at stake at the hands of police, which needs to be protected by this Court.

Conversely, learned A.A.G. refuted the allegations of the petitioner and has placed on record the statement of respondent No.1, whereby it has been disclosed that the petitioner as well as his other family members are involved in criminal cases, therefore, he is required in the matter pending under investigation, as such no protection under the law can be provided to him. He further contended that police has acted in accordance with law and no coercive action has been taken except in accordance with law, for which they are empowered under the Code of Criminal Procedure. At this stage, I enquired from the police officials present in Court, as to whether petitioner is involved in seven cases, as disclosed by them in the memo of statement; in reply thereto, they have submitted that petitioner is only involved in FIR No.71/2012 and FIR No.02/2013, so for as seven FIRs are concerned, his brother and others are booked.

Be that as it may, I am only concern, whether petitioner is involved in the aforesaid seven criminal cases or otherwise. I am cognizant of the fact that the police is at liberty to take action against any culprit, who is involved in criminal cases and the same action can be taken against them in accordance with law. At this learned counsel for petitioner has invited my attention that the petitioner has been granted bail in aforementioned two cases by the competent Court of law and no other case is registered against him so far.

The police officials, who are present in Court, have categorically stated that they have neither caused any harassment to the petitioner nor them intend to do so in future, but they would act strictly in accordance with law. The statements seem to be fair; upon which learned counsel for the petitioner has agreed for disposal of the instant petition.

In view of such statement of the police officials concurred by the learned Asstt: A.G., I am satisfied that the petition may be disposed of in view of the statements of the police officials present in Court.

In the light of above facts and circumstances of the case, the instant petition is disposed of with directions to official respondents to act strictly in accordance with law. However, it made clear that, if the petitioner is not involved in any criminal case, he may not be caused undue harassment and if he is involved or indulged in any criminal activities, the police will be at liberty to take action in accordance with law.

The petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

JUDGE