ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Misc. Appln. No.S- 11 of 2016

Priority case

1. For hearing of main case

2. For hearing of MA No.182/2016 (Stay)

11.02.2019

Mr. Sundar Khan Chachar Advocate for the Applicants

Mr. Ghulam Murtaza Korai, Advocate for Respondents 12 and 13

Syed Sardar Ali Shah, DPG for the State

>>>>>>>…<<<<<<<<

The applicants by way of instant criminal miscellaneous application has mainly sought for quashment of the FIR Crime No.119/2015 under Section 364, 511, 506/2, 148, 149 PPC of Police Station Baberloi with suspension of NBWs, if it is issued against the applicants in pursuant to registration of above said FIR against them.

2. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants being innocent have been involved in this case falsely by the police at the instance of their rivals. By contending so, he sought for quashment of FIR Crime No.119/2015 under Section 364, 511, 506/2, 148, 149 PPC of Police Station Baberloi against the applicants and others.

3. Learned DPG for the State and learned counsel for the private respondents have sought for dismissal of instant criminal miscellaneous application by contending that the applicants have to prove their innocence or otherwise by joining the trial before the Court which has already taken the cognizance of the case.

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

5. Admittedly the cognizance of the case has already been taken by the Court having jurisdiction. In that situation, the FIR against the applicants could not be quashed. If the applicants are having a feeling that they being innocent have been involved in a false case by the police at the instance of their rivals then they could prove their innocence by joining the trial.

6. In case of Director General Anti-Corruption Establishment Lahore and others vs. Muhammad Akram Khan and others (PLD 2013 SC 401), it has been held by Hon’ble Apex Court that;

“Quashing of F.I.R after Trial Court had taken cognizance of the offence---Legality---When Trial Court had taken cognizance of a case, F.I.R could not be quashed and the fate of the case and of the accused persons challaned therein was to be determined by the Trial Court itself---Accused persons in such circumstances, could avail the remedy under Ss.249-A & 265-K, Cr.P.C, to seek his premature acquittal, if the charge was found to be groundless or there was no possibility of his conviction.”

7. In view of above, the instant Criminal Miscellaneous Application being misconceived is dismissed accordingly.

Judge

ARBROHI