ORDER-SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA  

Crl. Misc. Appln. No. S- 223 of 2021.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

09.12.2022.

1.         For orders on office objections.

2.         For hearing of main case.

Mr. Naushad Ali Tagar, Advocate for applicant.

Mr. Muhammad Afzal Jagirani, Advocate for respondents No.4, 6 and 10.

Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy Prosecutor General.

~~~~~~~

Amjad Ali Sahito, J-    Through captioned criminal miscellaneous application, applicant Mst. Izzat Khatoon has impugned the order dated 16.06.2021, passed by the learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge/ Ex-Officio/ Justice of Peace, Shikarpur, whereby he has dismissed an application filed by the applicant in terms of Section 22-A & 22-B Cr.P.C, seeking order for registration of F.I.R., in respect of murder of her son, namely, Liaquat Ali.

            The learned counsel for applicant contended that learned Justice of Peace has erred in law and exercised discretion in favor of the proposed accused. He further added that the contents of application filed by the applicant under Section 22-A & 22-B Cr.P.C, prima-facie discloses the commission of a cognizable offence and as per provisions of Section 154 Cr.P.C the Officer Incharge of the Police station is required and bound to register F.I.R and he has no power to refuse. Lastly, he prayed that his application may be allowed and respondent No.1 may be directed to register F.I.R of the applicant.

            Perusal of the impugned order reflects that the learned Ex-Officio/ Justice of Peace called report from SHO of concerned Police station, who reported that no such incident has taken place within their jurisdiction and the applicant has filed application with false facts.

            Since, version of applicant has been negated by the concerned police with regard to happening of the alleged incident in a fashion as disclosed by the applicant in her application. In these circumstances, when concerned police has already negated and denied the version of the applicant, what would be expected from them if the F.I.R of the applicant is registered, as such proper course for the applicant would be that of availing adequate remedy in shape of direct complaint.

            In the case of Habibullah v. Political Assistant, Dera Ghazi Khan and others (2005 SCMR 951), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that filing of private complaint could provide an equal adequate relief to the petitioner because he could lead the entire evidence himself before the trial Court and his grievance could be adequately redressed considering also the fact that respondent/ SHO, who in the report and para-wise comments has mentioned adverse to the petitioner’s case, therefore, it could not be expected from the concerned SHO that he would carry independent and impartial investigation in the case. It may be stated that under the provisions of Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan it was not obligatory for the High Court to issue writ in each case irrespective of the facts and circumstances which could call for exercise of judicial restraint in turning down the request for registration of F.I.R in view of the conduct of the party besides considering that adequate remedy in the form of private complaint being available to the petitioner.

            In view of the above circumstances and the dictum laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, I am of the view that it would be appropriate for the applicant to institute a direct complaint before the Court having jurisdiction, where she could lead entire evidence herself and her grievance could be adequately redressed. With above observations, the application in hand being merit-less is dismissed.

                                                       Judge

Ansari