ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Misc. Application No.S- 568 of 2019

            For hearing of main case.

25-03-2021

Mr. Safdar Ali Bhatti advocate for the applicant.

            Mr. Abdul Waheed Bhanbhro advocate for proposed accused.

Mr. Syed Sardar Ali Shah, DPG for the State

>>>>>>>…<<<<<<<<

Irshad Ali Shah, J;-. The facts in brief necessary for disposal of instant Crl. Misc. Application are that the applicant allegedly extended loan of rupees twelve lacs to proposed accused, which he returned in shape of six cheques, some of them were bounced, when were presented before the concerned Bank for encashment, therefore the applicant by making an application u/s 22 A & B Cr.P.C sought for issuance of direction against the police to record his FIR, it was dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge / Ex-Officio Justice of Peace Gambat vide his order dated 01-08-2019 which is impugned by the applicant before this Court by making instant Crl. Misc. Application u/s 561-A Cr.P.C.

2.        It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the cognizable offence has taken place, therefore learned Ex-officio Justice of Peace/Additional Sessions Judge Gambat ought not have dismissed the application of the applicant by way of impugned order, such order being illegal is liable to be set-side with direction to police to record FIR of the applicant.

3.        Learned DPG for the State and learned counsel for the proposed accused by supporting the impugned order have sought for dismissal of the instant Criminal Miscellaneous Application by contending that the applicant by misusing the cheques of the proposed accused is intending to involve him in false case only to satisfy his matrimonial dispute with him.

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

5.        Apparently, the applicant and the proposed accused being related interse are disputed over matrimonial affairs. The cheques, which have been dishonoured are alleged to have been misused by the applicant, obviously to satisfy his matrimonial dispute with the proposed accused. If for the sake of argument, it is believed that the proposed accused has issued dishonoured cheques in favour of the applicant dishonestly even then the issuance of direction against the police to record the FIR of the applicant was not justified simply for the reason that the evidence which is likely to be collected by the police on investigation is already lying with the applicant, which he can produce by having a recourse u/s 200 Cr.P.C, if so is advised to him.

6.         In case of Rai Ashraf and others Vs. Muhammad Saleem Bhatti and others (PLD 2010 SC-691), it has been held by the Hon’ble Apex Court that;

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

7.        No illegality even otherwise is pointed out by learned counsel for the applicant, which may justify making interference with the impugned order by this Court by way of instant Crl. Misc. Application u/s 561-A Cr.P.C, it is dismissed accordingly.

Judge