IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT,

LARKANA

Crl. Misc. Appln. No. S-  23 of 2022.

Zulfiqar Ali Khuhawar.                                                       …………...Applicant.

Versus

Abdul Hameed,

& others.                                                                                ……..….Respondents.

            Mr. Mr. Habibullah G. Ghouri, Advocate for  applicant.

            Mr. Imran Ali Memon Advocate for respondents No.1 to 6.

            Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy Prosecutor General.

Date of hearing:                    24.11.2022.

Date of order:                       24.11.2022.

ORDER

Amjad Ali Sahito, J- Through this criminal miscellaneous application, the applicant has assailed the order dated 21.11.2020 passed by learned 1^st Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate Warah, whereby the learned Judge has dismissed a direct complaint filed by the applicant under section 203 Cr.P.C, and such order was upheld by learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Kamber, through his order dated 26.11.2021 passed in Crl. Revision Application No.13/2020.

            The facts of the case as depicted from para 3 of the impugned order dated 26.11.2021, read as under:

            “That on 17.9.2020 at 11.00 a.m. six identified accused named above being armed along with weapons in company of Asghar Lashari (Mukhtiarkar Warah and Hafeez Abro (Tapedar of Tapo Jogi) committed trespass at his land, damaged crop standing there, removed boundary marks, abused official powers as well as extended murderous threats, so he addressed such complaint to Commissioner, Larkana, as well as complained to P.S but his efforts ended in smoke giving rise to filing of direct complaint.”

            It appears that the learned Magistrate after hearing counsel appearing for the parties and considering the material made available before him passed the impugned order dismissing the direct complaint in terms of Section 203 Cr.P.C.  It was observed by the learned Magistrate that there were contradictions between contents of direct complaint and the statements/ depositions of complainant and his witnesses. Further that, the complainant failed to produce documentary proof that land survey No.867/2 comes within 20-chains, nor produced any Khasra report from Mukhtiarkar that he is cultivating the said land, but he admitted that Lal Bux unlawfully transferred the said survey number in his name and that civil suit is pending before the Board of Revenue Hyderabad; he also produced cop of such notice issued by Board of Revenue. Learned Magistrate further observed that from averments of direct complaint it smacks that the applicant converted the civil matter into criminal matter only to drag the parties.  

            It further appears that the learned Additional Sessions Judge, while dismissing the revision application, was of the same mind. Learned Additional Sessions Judge observed that, the statement of complainant and his purported eye witnesses are not in line with each other; that the complainant did not file any ownership document qua the land or copy of complaint, if any addressed by him to Commissioner, Larkana, or any Police officer in respect of the alleged incident; that before filing direct complaint the applicant filed revenue appeal to revenue authorities in respect of demarcation/ measurement of land in question. Learned Additional Sessions Judge concluded that applicant has got no arguable/ prima-facie case as agitated by him; he did not come to Court with clean hands, suppressed the material facts and direct complaint so filed by him is tainted with malice.

            Heard learned counsel for applicant, and learned counsel for private respondents as well as learned D.P.G and gone through the material available on record and the impugned orders as well.

            The learned counsel was confronted with the findings of the learned Magistrate as well as learned Additional Sessions Judge as particularized supra, and asked as to whether they were in accordance with the facts and he was unable to reply agreeably. Learned counsel was then asked to demonstrate any infirmity in the impugned Orders meriting interference by this Court, he again remained unable to demonstrate any infirmity. The impugned orders do not appear to be suffering from any illegality and irregularity, as such the same are maintained and the instant criminal miscellaneous application is hereby dismissed.

                                                              Judge

Ansari