ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR
Cr. Misc.
Application No.S-824 of 2021
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
1.
For
orders on office objection at flag `A`
2.
For
hearing of main case
3.
For
hearing of MA No.6545/2021
07-02-2022
Mr.
Muhammad Ali Napar, Advocate for applicant
Mr. Iftikhar
Ali Arain, Advocate for respondents
Syed Sardar Ali Shah Rizvi, Additional Prosecutor General
.-.-.-. -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
Zulfiqar Ali Sangi, J:- At
the very outset learned counsel for the applicant submits that neither the name
of applicant transpires in the application before Justice of Peace nor the
applicant was made party nor notice was issued to him. He next contended that
the opportunity of hearing was also not provided to him and impugned order has
been passed without hearing the applicant. He submits that in view of the case of
Younis Abbas and others v. Additional
Sessions Judge, Chakwal and others (PLD 2016 SC 581)
and the case of Mansoor Ali v. Station House Officer and
another (2015 P.Cr.L.J 48o) notice was
necessary and opportunity of hearing was to be given to the proposed accused.
2. Learned counsel for the
respondent and APG have submitted that they have no objection if order is
set-aside and case may be remanded to the learned Justice of Peace for passing
order afresh after hearing the proposed accused.
3. Admittedly applicant was not
party before the Justice of Peace nor any notice was issued to him and the
impugned order was passed without affording him the opportunity of hearing
which is the right of applicant and such exercise of Justice of Peace is in
violation of principle of Audi Alterm Partem. Resultantly, instant application is allowed, impugned
order is set-aside and case is remanded to the Justice of Peace who shall provide
opportunity of hearing to all the parties and then pass order afresh. Such
exercise shall be completed within one month from the date of the order.
JUDGE
Suleman Khan/PA