Order Sheet

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR

C. P. No. D – 891 of 2019

Before :

Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto

Mr. Justice Abdul Mobeen Lakho

Date of hearing : 03.10.2019.

Date of announcement : 24.10.2019.

Mr. Ghulam Shabbir Dayo, Advocate for petitioner.

Mr. Qurban Ali Malano, Advocate for respondent No.4.

Mr. Zulfiqar Ali Jatoi, Additional Prosecutor General.

Mr. Shahryar Imdad Awan, Assistant Advocate General Sindh along with DSP Legal Fida Hussain, SIP Nasrullah on behalf of SSP Khairpur, ASI Dhani Bakhsh on behalf of SSP Sukkur and ASI Zulfiqar Ali Ujjan on behalf of SSP Naushahro Feroze.

O R D E R

NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO, J. – By this Constitutional Petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, petitioner Ajeeb Ali son of Muhammad Hassan Lakho has prayed for transfer of investigation of Crime Nos.47/2019 of P.S Gambat, 93/2019 of P.S Kandiaro, 51/2019 of P.S Gambat and 52/2019 of P.S Sobhodero.

2. After issuance of the notices to the respondents, comments have been filed.

3. M. Ghulam Shabbir Dayo, counsel for petitioner contended that FIRs have been registered against the petitioner by the police for the mala fide reasons. It is further contended that police has failed to conduct fair investigation of FIRs. Lastly, it is submitted that despite orders of this Court dated 04.07.2019, police has registered FIRs against the petitioner and he prayed for transfer of the investigation of the aforesaid crimes to any honest police officer. In support of the contentions, he has relied upon the case reported as Raja Khurshid Ahmed v. Muhammad Bilal and others (2014 SCMR 474).

4. Mr. Zulfiqar Ali Jatoi, Additional Prosecutor General as well as Mr. Qurban Ali Malano, counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.4, argued that after usual investigation final reports / challans have been submitted in the aforesaid FIRs and presently cases are pending before competent Courts of law, and it is further argued that prayer made by the petitioner in the petition for transfer of investigation has become infructuous. In support of the contentions, Mr. Malano has relied upon the case of Rao Muhammad Shakir through Attorney v. Province of Sindh through Secretary, Government of Sindh and 6 others (PLD 2015 Sindh 213).

5. We have carefully heard the leaned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant record.

6. Learned Additional Prosecutor General has pointed out that after usual investigation, challans / final reports in Crime Nos.47/2019 of P.S Gambat, 93/2019 of P.S Kandiaro, 51/2019 of P.S Gambat and 52/2019 of P.S Sobhodero have already been submitted before the competent Courts of law. This petition was filed for transfer of investigation of the above FIRs, now that stage is over. Concerned Courts have already taken cognizance of offences. This Court in the case of Rao Muhammad Shakir through Attorney v. Province of Sindh through Secretary, Government of Sindh and 6 others (PLD 2015 Sindh 213), has already held that High Court in exercise of the constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, cannot direct the police to change the course of investigation. In the case of Wali Muhammad v. Haq Nawaz (PLD 1971 Supreme Court 717), it is also held that during the course of investigation, police has complete domain over the case in a cognizable offence and even High Court has no power to interfere in such investigation. The superior Courts of the country never approved transfer of the investigation without clear mala fide and always deprecated the same. Reliance is placed upon the case of Muhammad Bashir v. Station House Officer, Okara Cantt. and others (PLD 2007 Supreme Court 539).

7. In our considered view, as the cases are pending before the competent Courts of law, better course for the petitioner would be to approach the trial Courts for seeking any relief. The Trial Courts are directed to decide the cases expeditiously strictly in accordance with law.

8. The petition is without merit and the same is dismissed. Before parting with this order, it is observed that Mr. Ghulam Shabbir Dayo, counsel for petitioner filed contempt application during the course of arguments. Additional P.G and AAG claimed copy. Mr. Dayo is directed to supply them copy, contempt application to fixed after three (03) weeks.

J U D G E

Abdul Basit