Cr

ORDER SHEET.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR.

Cr.Misc.Appln.No. 613 of 2012.

1. For orders on MA 4043/2012.

2. For Katcha Peshi.

21.01.2012. Mr.Mushtaque Ahmed W. Abbasi advocate for the applicant.

Mr.Sardar Ali Shah APG a/w Inspector Nisar Ahmed Bullo SHO Police Station, Mirpur Mathelo.

SALAHUDDIN PANHWAR,J- Applicant Allah Bakhsh has assailed the order dated 06^thOctober.2012, whereby Application under Section 22-A&B, Cr.P.C was declined by Ex-Officio Justice of Peace/Sessions Judge, Ghotki.

2. Relevant facts of the case are that the applicant alleged that proposed accused with intention to kill her sister on the basis of allegation of KARAP intruded in his house; attempted to abduct her, caused aerial firing and issued threats of dire consequences.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant inter alia contends that the applicant approached before Justice of Peace/Sessions Judge, Ghotki; report was called from the SHO, but his application was declined on the ground that SHO Mirpur Mathelo in his report, has stated that no such incident has taken place and the applicant has pleaded false facts to get false FIR registered against the proposed accused; thereby impugned order is illegal.

4. Conversely learned APG appearing for the State contends that the impugned order is according to law; applicant and proposed accused are related inter se and apparently there is matrimonial dispute between parties.

5. Since the applicant has tried to record his statement, for registration of case against the proposed accused regarding the attempt of abduction of his sister with intention to kill on KARAP allegation and causing aerial firing by the accused persons but his application was declined by the Justice of Peace on the ground that the SHO has opined that no offence was committed. It will be suffice to say that such course adopted by Justice of Peace is against the norms of settled principles. It is pertinent to mention here that recording of statement is mandatory right of every informant and in case informant makes out his case of a cognizable offence in that eventuality FIR should be lodged and investigation be carried out, and during investigation I.O can opine regarding truthfulness of the incident but even then such opinion is not binding upon a Magistrate while passing an order on a summary report, thus the impugned order is not maintainable.

6. Consequently, this application is allowed and the impugned order dated 06.10.2012 is set aside. The concerned SHO is hereby directed to record the statement of the applicant and if such statement reflects that ingredients of cognizable offense are evident, register the FIR against the proposed accused.

JUDGE

Akber.

ORDER SHEET.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR.

C.P.No. 3492 of 2012.

For Katcha Peshi.

21.12.2012. Mr.Amanullah Shar advocate for the petitioner alongwith Mst.Aasiya Bibi.

Mr.Agha Ather Hussain AAG alongwith SIP Abdul Razak SHO PS ‘A’ Section, Sukkur (respondent No.3).

Petitioner Mst.Aasiya Bibi has invoked the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court and prays for protection.

Petitioner present in Court states that she being sui juris has exercised her right of marriage and has contracted marriage with Muhammad Kashif. Due to fear she has shifted from Rahimyar Khan and residing within the jurisdiction of Police Station ‘A’ Section, Sukkur and she has apprehension that respondent Nos.4 and 5 at the behest of private respondent Nos.6 to 11 will cause harassment to the petitioner and her husband and will implicate them in false cases.

Respondent Nos.2 and 3 have filed their statements, in which, it is stated that they have not harassed the petitioner at the instance of any person and they are ready to provide her legal protection.

Learned AAG contends that respondent No.3, who is present in Court will provide the protection to the petitioner and her husband as and when they will approach him.

Since owing to the statement, respondent No.3 SHO Police Station ‘A’ Section, Sukkur is hereby directed to provide protection to the petitioner and her husband according to law and in case of any harm, take action against the persons, who are causing harassment to the petitioner and her husband.

JUDGE

Akber.

ORDER SHEET.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR.

C.P.No. 3552 of 2012.

1.For orders on office objection at Flag.A.

2.For orders on CMA 11156/12.

3.For orders on CMA 11157/12.

4.For Katcha Peshi.

21.12.2012. Mr.Zulifquar Ali Sangi advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Agha Ather Hussain AAG a/w SHO PS Daharki.

SHO Police Station, Daharki (respondent No.9) files his statement, which is taken on record.

Petitioner Abdul Fattah has invoked the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court and prays for direction regarding investigation of FIR Crime No.242/2012 of Police Station, Daharki registered for an offence under Section 302, 47, 148, 149, PPC.

Per learned counsel after the lodgment of FIR, the I.O of the case is not conducting the investigation according to law and some of the accused are still absconder.

Learned AAG states that investigation has been conducted impartially; pursuant to that investigation four accused persons have been arrested and remaining five accused persons have got bail from the concerned Court and the case is being challaned according to law without being influence.

Since the I.O of this case is present in Court and has given a categorical statement regarding the investigation of aforesaid crime, on such statement, learned counsel for the petitioner stands satisfied and states that the I.O may be directed to challan the case in accordance with law and provide the protection to the petitioner. Official respondent present in Court is directed to provide legal protection to the petitioner and his other family members according to law.

JUDGE

Akber.