ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA
Crl.Misc.Appln.No.S-66 of 2018.
|
Date of hearing |
Order with signature of Judge |
Before: Mr.Justice Irshad Ali Shah.
1. For orders on office objection “A”
2. For hearing on M.A.No.983/2018
3. For hearing of case.
4. For orders on M.A.No.984/2018
29.11.2018.
Mr. Muhammad Afzal Jagirani, Advocate for applicants. Mr. Wajid Hussain Qazi, Advocate for private respondent Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, D.P.G.
~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~
The applicants by way of instant Crl.Misc.Applicatoin have impugned an order dated 13.03.2018, passed learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, Larkana, whereby he has directed SHO P.S Rehmatpur, to record statement of the private respondent for the purpose of FIR.
The facts in brief necessary for disposal of instant Crl.Misc.Applicatoin are that as per the private respondent, the applicants and others by committing trespass in her house, by insulting her take away her relative Ghulam Hussain together with his belongings, she reported the incident to SHO P.S Rehmatpur, but her FIR was not recorded and then she by way of an application u/s 22-A & B Cr.PC sought for direction against SHO P.S Rehmatpur to record her FIR, which was issued by learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, Larkana, by way of impugned order.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the private respondent is intending to involve the applicants in a false case only to get favour from them for her relative Ghulam Hussain, who is involved in abduction case of P.S Khabar. By contending so, he sought for reversal of the impugned order, as the same according to him has been passed by learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, Larkana, without lawful justification or considering the material brought on record.
Learned counsel for the private respondent and learned D.P.G sought for dismissal of the instant Crl.Misc.Applicatoin by supporting the impugned order.
I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.
It has come on record that Ghulam Hussain who allegedly is involved in abduction of Mst.Fareeda Khatoon, was apprehended by the applicants and others in FIR Crime No.11/2017, u/s 363, 365-B, 34 PPC of P.S Khabar. In that situation, it is rightly being contended by learned counsel for the applicants that it was wrongly pleaded by private respondent in her application u/s 22-A & B Cr.PC that Ghulam Hussain was taken away by applicants and others together with his belongings. In these premises, it could be concluded safely that the private respondents obviously has sought for direction for recording of FIR against applicants and others only to get favour from them for her relative Ghulam Hussain malafidely.
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.”
In view of above, the impugned order is set aside, the private respondent is set at liberty to file a direct complaint of the incident, before the Court having jurisdiction, if so is advised to him.
The instant Crl.Misc.Application is disposed of accordingly together with listed applicatoins.
..