ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA
Constt. Petition No. S- 224 of 2012.
Date of hearing |
Order with signature of Judge |
1. For order on office objection.
2. For Katcha Peshi.
19.04.2012.
Miss. Rubina Dhamrah, Advocate for petitioners.
Mr. Altaf Hussain Surahyo, State counsel alongwith PSI Akhtar Hussain Burdi for S.S.P Larkana, and SIP Sher Afsar SHO Civil Line, P.S Larkana.
~~~
Statement has been filed by the respondent No. 5, which is taken on record. Mr. Zahid Hussain Chandio, Advocate files Vakalatnama on behalf of the respondents No. 2, 3 and 4, the same is also taken on record.
At very outset learned counsel for the petitioners contended that grievance of the petitioners is that they are being harassed by the official respondents at the behest of private respondents and therefore, they apprehend their lives in imminent danger. However, Mr. Zahid Hussain Chandio counsel for the private respondents categorically stated that neither the respondents have caused any sort of harassment to the petitioners, nor they intend to do so in future. Per learned counsel the bone of contention between the parties is immovable property left by deceased Manzoor Ali, the father of petitioner No.2 and respondent No. 1.
Be that as it may, the official respondents are under statutory obligation to provide protection to every citizen subject to law of land; they are not supposed to indulge in any litigation between the parties.
In the given circumstances, the instant petition is disposed of with directions to official respondents to act strictly in accordance with law and not to cause any sort of harassment to either party.
Judge