ORDER SHEET

THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Cr. Misc. Appln. No. S- 92 of 2024

Date	Order with signature of Judge

1. For orders on office objection-A.

2. For hearing of main case.

3. For hearing of MA No.1105 of 2025.

03-03-2025

Mr.  Saeed Ahmed Bijarani, advocate for the applicant

Mr. Nazir Ahmed Bhangwar, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State.

                                      --------------

Khalid Hussain Shahani-J: Applicant Allah Bux and others have impugned an order dated 14.03.2024, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kashmore at Kandhkot in capacity of Ex-Officio Justice of Peace. In terms of the said order, an application filed by respondent No.3 under section 22-A & B Cr.P.C, seeking directions for the registration of an F.I.R, was allowed.

2. Learned Counsel for the applicants has argued that infact no offence has occurred and that the application filed by respondent No.3  Bahram Khan was based on malice.

3. Learned Deputy Prosecutor General, Sindh has supported the impugned order.

4. Heard and perused the record.

5. If a person has having an information about an offence having been committed, he is entitled under Section 154, Cr.P.C to approach the police station of competent jurisdiction. It is then up to the police officer to determine, whether the information reveals an offence having been committed and if yes, whether it would be categorized as a cognizable or a non-cognizable offence. The Cr.P.C. and the Police Rules have ample guidance for S.H.Os to proceed in all these scenarios. At this juncture, learned Counsel for the applicant argues, the impugned order appears to say that an FIR should be registered only if a cognizable offence has been committed; such orders are usually misinterpreted by the police to mean that the Ex-Officio Justice of Peace has ordered a compulsory registration of an FIR. Learned Counsel is correct to this extent that experience has shown that police officers too indeed interpret such orders to mean directions passed by the Ex-Officio Justice of Peace for mandatory registration of an FIR. It is clarified that the order of 14.03.2024 apart from the fact that in itself it does not order a compulsory registration of FIR should not be interpreted to mean the same by the police.

6. Given the above, the respondent No.3 may approach the competent police station with the information that he possess. The police shall act in accordance with law and ensure that they remain neutral as an allegation of the police being influenced has been made by learned counsel. It is clarified that this order should not be interpreted to mean that a mandatory direction to register an F.I.R, is being made.

7. Application is disposed of in the above terms.

                                                                                         JUDGE

S.Ashfaq*