ORDER SHEET

THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Cr. Misc. Appln. No. S-159 of 2020

 

Date	Order with signature of Judge

 

For hearing of main case.

03-09-2020

 

Mr. Ashique Illahi, Advocate for the applicants

Mr.Abdul Ghani Bijarani, Advocate for private respondent

Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Addl.P.G for the State.      

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

 

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- The facts in brief necessary for disposal of instant Crl.Misc.Application are that the applicants allegedly after having formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object, by making trespass into house of private respondent, maltreated him and then went away by committing mischief and theft of his belongings. The private respondent allegedly approached the police for recording of the FIR, it was not recorded and he then sought for direction against the police to record his FIR by way of making an application under section 22-A & B Cr.PC, it was issued by learned Ex-Office Justice of Peace, by way of his order dated 24.06.2020, which is impugned by the applicants before this Court by way of instant Crl.Misc.Application. 

2.                    It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that no incident alleged by the private respondent has taken place; the injuries sustained by the private respondent are self suffered and those even otherwise have been declared to be non cognizable by medical officer concerned; the private respondent is intending to involve the applicants in a false case malafidely in order to satisfy his dispute with them over landed property. By contending so, he sought for setting aside of the impugned order.

3.                    Learned D.P.G for the State and learned counsel for the private respondent by supporting the impugned order have sought for dismissal of the instant Crl.Misc.Application by contending that the narration made by the private respondent constitutes a cognizable offence. By contending so, they sought for dismissal of the instant Crl.Misc.Application.

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

5.                    The injuries sustained by the private respondent are “Shajjah-e-Khafifah” and those are non cognizable. The parties admittedly are disputed over the landed property and such dispute between them is pending adjudication before the Civil Court having jurisdiction. In these circumstances, the contention of learned counsel for the applicants that they are being involved in the case malafidely by the private respondent in order  to satisfy his dispute with them over the landed property, cannot be lost sight of.

6.                    In case of Rai Ashraf & others vs. Muhammad Saleem Bhatti & others (PLD 2010 SC-691), it has been held by the Honourable Apex Court;

“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 him under Lahore Development Authority Act, 1975, Rules and Regulations framed thereunder---Application for registration of FIR had been filed with malafide intention.”

7.                    In view of above, the instant Crl.Misc.Application is accepted. Consequently, the impugned order is set aside. The private respondent however may exhaust his remedy under section 200 Cr.PC, if so is advised.

 

                                                                                             J U D G E