ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR
C. P No.D - 493 of
2019
Priority case
1. For orders on office
objection
2. For hearing of CMA No.1848/19
3. For hearing of main case
15.05.2019
Mr. Ubaidullah Kalwar Advocate
for the petitioner
Mr. Shevak Ram Valecha
Advocate for private respondent
Mr. Agha Athar Hussain
Pathan AAG
>>>>>>>…<<<<<<<<
The petitioner by way of
instant Constitutional Petition has sought for quashment of the FIR Crime No.36/2019
which is lodged with of Police Station Abad, Sukkur mainly for the reason that the
same being false has been lodged malafidely.
2. It is contended by learned
counsel for the petitioner that the FIR has been lodged without any inquiry
only to create harassment for the petitioner and his company as such same is
liable to be quashed.
3. Learned DPG for the State
and learned counsel for the private respondent have sought for dismissal of
instant constitutional petition by contending that the interim charge sheet has
already been submitted by the police and cognizance whereof has been already
been taken by the Court.
4. We have considered the above
arguments and perused the record.
5. There is no denial to the
fact that interim charge sheet of the case has been submitted by the police and
cognizance whereof has been taken by the court having jurisdiction. In such
circumstances, the FIR which is sought to be quashed by the applicant could not
be quashed legally. If the applicant or anyone else is 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 may prove their innocence by joining the
trial, if they are advised so.
6. In case of Director
General Anti-Corruption Establishment Lahore and others vs. Muhammad Akram Khan
& ors (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 Constitutional Petition being misconceived is dismissed accordingly.
Judge
Judge
Rafi