ORDER SHEET
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR
Crl.
Misc. Application No.S-59 of 2020)
(Munwar Alam Khan Vs. Qurban Ali Malano & others)
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
1.
For hearing of MA No. 1274/2020
2.
for hearing of MA No. 1293/2020
3.
For hearing of main case.
20-02-2023.
Mr.
Rashid Khan Durrani, advocate for applicant.
Mr.
Sarfraz Ahmed Akhund,
advocate for the private respondents.
Mr. Shafi Muhammad Mahar, Deputy P.G
for the State.
.-.-.-. -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
Irshad Ali Shah, J; The applicant by
way of instant Crl. Misc. Application u/s 561-A Cr.P.C has impugned an order dated 30-01-2020 passed by learned
Additional Session Judge (Hudood)/Ex-Officio Justice
of Peace, Sukkur, whereby he has directed SSP Sukkur to conduct impartial
inquiry through a senior police officer not below the rank of DSP; have version
of the proposed accused and if cognizable offence is made out, then direct
registration of such FIR u/s 154 Cr.P.C.
2. It is contended by learned counsel for
the applicant that cognizable offence has taken place, therefore, learned
Ex-Officio Justice of Peace ought not to have directed registration of FIR
after inquiry, which was alien in legal proceedings. By contending so, he
sought for direction against the police for recording FIR of the applicant for
the alleged incident at his verbatim by modifying the impugned order. In
support of his contention he relied upon case of Muhammad Bashir Vs. SHO Okara
Cant & others (PLD 2007 SC 539).
3. It
is contended by learned counsel for the private respondents that the applicant
is intending to involve the private respondents in a criminal case malafidely only to satisfy his grudge with them over Bar politics. By contending so, he sought for dismissal of
instant Crl. Misc. Application by supporting the
impugned order. In support of his contention, he has relied upon case of Rai Ashraf & others Vs. The
Muhammad Saleem Bhatti
& others (PLD 2010 SC 691).
4. Learned DPG for the State was fair
enough to say that the applicant has an alternate remedy to exhaust by filing a
direct complaint before the Court having jurisdiction.
5. Heard arguments and perused the record.
6. There appears to be dispute between the
parties over Bar politics, such dispute they are
extending to their families. If for the sake of arguments, it is believed that
a cognizable offence has taken place and for that the FIR of the applicant is
not being recorded by the police for one or other reason, even then the
applicant has an alternate remedy to exhaust u/s 200 Cr.P.C
by filing direct complaint before the Court having jurisdiction; such remedy,
if is exhausted, despite being alternate would be adequate in the circumstances
of the case; consequently the impugned order is modified to the said extent.
7. The instant Crl.
Misc. Application is disposed of accordingly along with pending applications.
JUDGE
Nasim /PA