IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR
Const. Petition No.S-1689 of 2017
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
1. For orders on CMA No.3289/2018
2. For hearing of CMA No.3290/2018
28-05-2018
Mr.
Khan Muhammad Shaikh, Advocate for the petitioner
Miss
Farzana Bhatti, Advocate for private respondents
Mr.
Shahid Aziz Kaleri, Advocate along with contemnor No.1
Assadullah
Pathan SHO PS Baberloi
.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
Today SHO Police
Station Baberloi the alleged contemnor No.1 Assadullah Pathan is present along with
his counsel Mr. Shahid Aziz Kaleri who submits that the said SHO has not
committed any contempt of Court and he has been already transferred as incharge
DIB Branch Shikarpur. On behalf of private respondents Miss Farzana Bhatti
(Advocate) has filed objections along with copies of earlier orders passed by
learned Additional Sessions Judge II and I Khairpur, respectively, qua
Ex-Officio Justice of Peace in Cr.Misc. A. No.1644/2018 and 2709/2017. Scrutiny
of these orders show that primarily the proceedings were initiated against the
same private respondents except respondents 8, 9 and 10 and both the above
criminal miscellaneous applications were dismissed and in the last order dated
14.05.2018 it has been observed that the same was filed with mala fide
intention. When confronted with this, the learned counsel for the petitioner states
that the above referred cases were filed by brother of the petitioner and it has
distinct facts which are different from the present grievance of the petitioner.
The arguments has no force as in the previous proceedings as well as in the
present one primarily controversy is same, inter
alia, relating to causing harassment, purported stealing of articles by the
present respondents for which the petitioner’s brother Mumtaz Ali wanted to
lodge a FIR and on refusal by police, the above proceedings were filed but same
were dismissed.
Even for the
arguments sake if the grievance of present petition is distinct from the above
proceedings, the appropriate remedy lies elsewhere before the appropriate forum
and not directly in this writ jurisdiction. It is apparent that the Order of
07.12.2017 was obtained by concealing the facts about earlier litigation; present
petitioner has not disclosed the aforementioned cases/proceedings before the
Ex-officio Justice of Peace, although the learned counsel states that the above
proceedings were initiated by the brother of present petitioner. This argument
has hardly any force. Secondly, even in the present Contempt Application the
petitioner has not specifically stated any incident which can constitute a
violation of the above Court Order.
In view of the
above, present contempt application is dismissed being meritless, but with
direction that Official Respondents/Police will ensure that no untoward
incident occurs and will take strict action in this regard. Copy of this order
be provided to learned AAG for information and compliance.
JUDGE
Suleman Khan/PA