ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Crl.Misc.Appln.No.S-231 of 2018.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

Before:  Mr.Justice Irshad Ali Shah.

1. For hearing of case.

2. For orders on M.A.No.4217/2018

29.11.2018.

                   Mr. Muhammad Afzal Jagirani, Advocate for applicants.

                        Mr.Mir Muhammad Bhagat, Advocate for private respondent                            Mr.Aitbar Ali Bullo, D.P.G.

~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~

                   The facts in brief necessary for disposal of instant Crl.Misc.Applicatoin are that as per the private respondent that the culprits named in her application u/s 22-A & B Cr.PC, by committing trespass in her house took away her son Khamiso and others and then committed murder of Khamiso, on account of her failure to make them payment, the incident as per private respondent was reported to the police but her FIR was no recorded and then she by way of filing an application u/s 22-A & B Cr.PC sought for direction against SHO P.S Fatehpur for recording of her statement for the purpose of FIR on disclosure of cognizable offence, which was issued by learned 6^th Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-officio Justice of Peace, Larkana, vide his order dated 29.08.2018, which is impugned by the applicants before this Court by way of instant Crl.Misc.Applicatoin u/s 561-A Cr.PC.

                   It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that Khamiso has died of police encounter; the applicants have nothing to do with such encounter, the private respondent in order to grab money from the applicants is intending to involve them in a false case. By contending so, he sought for reversal of the impugned order. 

                   Learned D.P.G and learned counsel for the private respondent sought for dismissal of the instant Crl.Misc.Applicatoin by contending that the order impugned is well reasoned.

                   I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

                    In the instant matter, deceased Khamiso is alleged to have died of unnatural death, such allegation could not be lost sight of under the pretext that the applicants are having nothing to do with such unnatural death of deceased Khamiso. The allegation in face of it constitutes a cognizable offence; the same could not be left to go un-noticed. If the applicants are having a feeling that they are being involved in a false case by the private respondent for any reason then they could prove their innocence before the police by joining the investigation, if so is advised to them. The impugned order is appearing to be well reasoned and it is not calling for any interference by this Court by way of instant Crl.Misc.Applicatoin, it is dismissed accordingly.

                                                                                     JUDGE