ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Criminal Misc. Application No. S- 120 of 2022

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

Fresh case.

1. For orders on office/objection at Flag ‘A’.

2. For hearing of main case.

3. For orders on MA No. 1055/2022 (Stay)

4.

01.04.2022.

Mr. Abdul Raheem Jamro, Advocate for applicant.

Mr. Aftab Ahmed Shar, Additional Prosecutor General.

-.-.-.

Through the instant Criminal Misc. Application, the applicant has impugned the Order dated 28.02.2022 passed by 1^st. Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate Gambat in summary report No.04 of 2022 arising out of FIR No.1/2022 under sections 397, 114, 342, 355, 506/2 PPC registered at Police Station Teepani Bahleem. After a thorough investigation I.O of the case submitted report for disposal of case in ‘B’ Class but the concerned Magistrate did not agree with the report of I.O and took cognizance of the offences.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is dispute between the parties over the landed property as such the police officials have rightly disposed of the case under ‘B’ class and lastly prayed that impugned order may be set aside and the report filed by the police officials may be accepted.

3. On the other hand Mr. Hamid Ali Memon Advocate made his appearance, filed vakalatnama on behalf of respondent No.5 who has supported the impugned order and submits that the accused persons have committed offences but the police officials with ulterior motives filed the report under ‘B’ class.

4. Learned Additional P.G also supported the impugned order, however, he submits that in view of the case reported in the case of Director General Anti-Corruption Establishment, Lahore and others vs. Muhammad Akram Khan and others (PLD 2013 Supreme Court 401) that the applicant as well as other accused persons can avail remedy under sections 249-A or 265-K Cr.P.C to seeks his/their pre-mature acquittal.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for complainant, learned Additional P.G and have scanned the material available on record. From the perusal of record it reflects that admittedly the names of accused persons are mentioned in the FIR with their specific role that they armed with deadly weapons in furtherance of their common object caused lathi/butt blows to PW Muhammad Usman who was seriously injured, robbed Vigo Tel mobile and accused Umair and Tanveer wrongfully confined complainant in the otaq. After thorough enquiry Investigation Officer submitted report for disposal of case under ‘B’ class before the concerned Magistrate but Magistrate was not agree with the report of I.O took cognizance of the offence. It is settled principle of law that opinion of the police officers is not binding upon the Courts as such no interference required in the impugned order which is speaking one, resultantly instant Criminal Misc. Application is dismissed. However the accused persons are at liberty to avail remedy under sections 249-A and 265-K Cr.P.C to seek his/their pre-mature acquittal in view of the judgment report in the case of Director General Anti-Corruption Establishment, Lahore and others vs. Muhammad Akram Khan and others (PLD 2013 Supreme Court 401) cited by learned Additional Prosecutor General.

6. The instant Criminal Misc. Application is disposed of in the above terms.

Judge

Irfan/P.A