ORDER   SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Crl.Misc.Appln.No.D-05 of 2021.

_________________________________________________________________

DATE                                       ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

_________________________________________________________________

Before:

Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah,

 Mr. Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi,

01. For orders on office objection “A”.

02. For orders on M.A.No.3469/2021 (E/A).

03. For hearing of main case.

27.10.2021

                        Mr. Riaz Ahmed Khoso, Advocate for petitioner.

                        =  *  = * = * = * = * =

1.                     Urgency granted.

2.                     Exemption granted.

3.                     The facts in brief necessary for passing the instant order that the applicant was nominated as accused by complainant Muhammad Waris for abduction of his son Ayaz Ahmed for ransom, in his FIR lodged by him with P.S Rehmatpur, Larkana. On investigation, the applicant was let off by the police by placing his name in column No.2 of charge sheet, subsequently, he was joined in trial by learned Judge Anti-Terrorism Court, Larkana, by disagreeing with the conclusion of police vide order dated 13.03.2021, which is impugned by the applicant before this Court by making the instant Crl.Misc.application under section 561-A Cr.PC.  

                        It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant being innocent was falsely involved by the complainant in abduction case of his son and he on the basis of honest investigation, has been let off by the police and now has been joined in trial by learned trial Court without lawful justification by way of impugned order, which is liable to be examined by this Court in exercise of its inherit jurisdiction.

                        We have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

                        It is settled by now that the opinion of the police has got no binding effect on the Courts and the Courts have to form its own opinion for cognizance of the case/offence, on the basis of material collected by the police during course of investigation. The applicant is named in FIR by the complainant with specific allegation for demand of ransom for return of his son, the abductee; such allegation ought not to have been brushed aside by the investigating officer by declaring the applicant to be innocent by placing his name in column No.2 of charge sheet, on the basis of evidence produced before him by the applicant in his defence. By undertaking such exercise, the investigating officer obviously has encroached upon the powers of the Court which alone is competent to declare the accused under accusation to be innocent or otherwise. In these circumstances, the learned trial Court was right to have joined the applicant in trial by disagreeing with opinion of the investigating officer, by way of impugned order, which is not found to be illegal or cursory to be interfered with by this Court in exercise of its inherit jurisdiction.

                        In view of above, the instant Crl.Misc.application being misconceived is dismissed in limine, directing the applicant to prove his innocence by joining trial before the learned trial Court.

J U D G E

  J U D G E