ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Misc. Application No.S- 871 of 2018

Date Order with Signature of Hon’ble Judge

For Orders on office objection.

For hearing of main case

06-05-2019

Mr. Alam Sher Bozdar, advocate for applicant.

Mr. Ali Ahmed Vistro, advocate for respondent No.2.

Mr. Syed Sardar Ali Shah Rizvi, Deputy P.G

>>>>>>>…<<<<<<<<

Irshad Ali Shah, J; The applicant by way of instant Criminal Miscellaneous Application under Section 561-A Cr.PC, has impugned an order dated 09-10-2018, passed by learned IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge/ Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, Naushahro Feroze, on application u/s 22-A & B Cr.P.C, which reads as under;

“The SSP Nausherho Feroze is directed to take action against police officers mentioned in the application for no lodging FIR of the applicant whose son and daughter in law have been illegally removed from the custody of applicant thereby her family has become divided and make arrangement for bringing back son and daughter in law of application as the police party came from Police Station Pirabad Karachi and have abducted children of Mst. Haidan without producing any Court order to the SHO, therefore, application u/s 22-A & B CrPC is allowed with direction to lodge the FIR against the police officials who are involved in this offence, however, no arrest shall be made without tangible evidence, during proceedings of misconduct against them. The SHO Police Station Bhiria City is directed to intimate the compliance of order to this Court without fail. However, the SSP Naushehro Feroze is directed to take action against SHO Ihsan Buledi for violating Court Order despite intimation of learned advocate Mr. Ali Ahmed Vistro.”

2. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has committed no offence, but has discharge the lawful duty by extending legal help to police party of PS Pirabad, District West Karachi, to recover Mst. Shabana, the abducted lady of FIR Crime No. 362/2018 u/s 496-A PPC of PS Pirabad West Karachi and she after recording of her statement has been set free in favour of her father Gul Badshah by the Magistrate having jurisdiction. By contending so, he sought for setting aside of the impugned order, as same according to him has been obtained by the private respondent malafideldy to satisfy his grudge against the applicant being police officer.

3. Learned DPG for the State did not support the impugned order by stating that it is obtained by the person, who was having no concern with the incident.

4. It is contended by learned counsel for private respondent that the applicant and others have taken away her daughter in law Mst. Shabana and then let her go with her father Gul Badshah in violation of the Court orders, as such the applicant and others are liable to be prosecuted for having committed an offence punishable u/s 220 PPC. By contending so, he sought for dismissal of instant Cr. Misc. Application.

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

6. Admittedly Mst. Shabana was abductee of FIR Crime No. 362/2018 u/s 496-A PPC of PS Pirabad District West Karachi, she was recovered by the police and then was set free in favour of her father Gul Badshah after recording of her statement by the Magistrate having jurisdiction. The allegation against the applicant is to the extent that he with others extended help to the policed party of PS Pirabad, District West Karachi to recover Mst. Shabana in above said FIR. By doing so, the applicant has hardly committed an offence. It was all done by him in discharge of his lawful duty as police officer. If for that sake of argument, it is believed that the applicant has committed an offence, punishable u/s 220 PPC then same as per column No. 3 chapter XI schedule II to CrPC is non-cognizable in its nature. In these circumstances, the impugned order could not be sustained, it is set aside with liberty to the private respondent to file the direct complaint of the incident before the Court having jurisdiction.

7. In case of Rai Ashraf and others Vs. Muhammad Saleem Bhatti and others (PLD 2010 SC-691), it has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan that;

“ Validity---Dispute between parties was over such house---Applicant had secured restrain, order against respondent from Civil Court, and for its violation, he had a remedy before Civil Court---Applicant had an alternate remedy to file private complaints against respondent---Applicant had filed another application before Ex-officio Justice of Peace/Additional Sessions Judge to restrain public functionaries from taking action against under Lahore Development Authority Act, 1975, Rules and Regulations framed thereunder---Application for registration of FIR had been filed with malafide intention.”

8. Instant Criminal Miscellaneous Application is disposed of in above terms.

Judge

Nasim/P.A