IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Misc. Application No.S-329 of 2021

Applicant: Akash Kumar Hindhu, through Mr. Naeemuddin Z. Kasimi, Advocate.

Proposed accused: Mr. Ajeebullah Junejo, Advocate.

State: Through Khalil Hussain Matelo, D.P.G.

Date of hearing: 24.09.2021

Date of decision: 24.09.2021

O R D E R

Zulfiqar Ali Sangi, J: Through this application, the applicant has assailed the order dated 07.05.2021, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pano Aqil, wherein an application under Section 22-A(6)(i) & 22-B Cr.P.C, filed by the applicant, was dismissed.

2. Learned Counsel for the Applicant, at the very outset, submits that though there was availability of documentary evidence before learned Additional Sessions Judge in respect of cognizable offence; however inspite of that, application was dismissed. He next argued that it is obligatory duty of Station House Officer to register an FIR when a person approaching him and narrating the facts of cognizable offence. He further submitted that from the averments of application, cognizable offence is made out, therefore, SHO be directed to register the FIR of the Applicant.

3. Learned counsel representing the proposed accused has contended that no case for lodging the FIR is made out as the cheques in question have been misused by the Applicant with malafide intentions. His next contention is that one cheque in question is in the name of Qabil Chachar and not in the name of applicant, other one is without mentioning any name. He further submitted that there are contradictory versions of the Applicant. He next contended that applicant wants to lodge a false FIR with malafide intentions just to cause harassment.

4. Learned DPG has supported the impugned order and submits that no case for lodging FIR is made out; however applicant may approach Civil Court for redressal of his grievance.

5. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have gone through the material available on record.

6. On perusal of para-6 of the application filed by the Applicant before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pano Akil, wherein the applicant has mentioned that on 24.05.2018, applicant approached to the proposed accused for amount to which proposed accused gave him some cheques and, on presentation, the same were dishonored. However, cheque No.57743525, available at page-21 of the Court file, reflects the date i.e.20.11.2017 and another cheque bearing No.57743530, available at page-23, reflects that date/year of cheque is written twicely; besides such cheque is without name then issuance of memo on such cheque is doubtful. From these facts, it reflects that applicant wants to register false FIR against the proposed accused by misusing the provisions of Section 22-A Cr.P.C.

7. The Apex Courts in so many cases held that the Courts in mechanical manner should not allow applications under Section 22-A and B Cr.P.C and should apply its mind as to whether the applicant has approached the Court with clean hands or it is tainted with malice. From perusal of the record I am of the view that it was tainted with malice and no case for issuing directions to the concerned SHO for recording of statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C is made out. Resultantly this application is dismissed. However, it will be open to applicant to file direct complaint against the proposed accused if so advised and observations made in these proceedings will not come in the way of the applicant.

JUDGE