ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Crl. Misc. Appln. No.S-178      of  2012

DATE OF HEARING

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

15.01.2013.

1. For orders on office objection.

2. For Katcha Peshi.

Mr. Ghayoor Abbas M. Shahani, advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Zahid Hussain Thaheem, advocate for respondents/proposed accused.

Mr. Imtiaz Ahmed Shahani, State Counsel.

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

                   It appears that the applicant filed application under Section 22-A, Cr.P.C for lodging an F.I.R.  Such application was dismissed by the learned III-Additional Sessions Judge, Shikarpur by order dated 29.8.2012 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.418/2012. 

                   It is brought to the notice that earlier the applicant approached the D.I.G.P., Larkana and on his complaint an enquiry was conducted and the proposed accused in the application under Section 22-A was declared as innocent despite the fact that no offence was registered as contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant.

                   I have gone through the statement that has been filed by the respondent No.2 in which it is claimed that number of cases were registered against the deceased accused Baboo and challaned in the concerned Court.  Such offences are as under :-

1. Crime No.73/2005, u/s 302, 460, PPC, PS Khanpur.

2. Crime No.62/2007, u/s 17(3), E.H.O., PS Khanpur.

3. Crime No.05/2001, u/s 324, 353, PPC, PS Rustam.

4. Crime No.20/2006, u/s 17(3), E.H.O., PS Rustam.

5. Crime No.105/2008, u/s 13(d), A.O., PS Rustam.

6. Crime No.42/2007, u/s 302, PPC, PS Rustam.

7. Crime No.70/2007, u/s 302, 364, PPC, PS Rustam.

                   It is, however, quite surprising that an enquiry that was conducted by D.I.G pursuant to the application made by the applicant the proposed accused was declared as innocent and no statement of the applicant was recorded under Section 154, Cr.P.C and at no time the concerned S.H.O. took cognizance of the statement that is proposed to be recorded by the applicant. I do not see any justification in passing the impugned order whereby it was observed as under :-

          "Since there are quite contra-version reveals at one juncture applicant claims police party committed murder of applicant's son, while report of SHO police station Khanpur reveals that accused during encounter lost his life, it would be beneficial for the applicant in order to resolve her grievance and evaluated the factum of murder charge of her son through direct complaint, therefore, she is advised to invoke remedy of direct complaint before the court of law if so desire, under these circumstances I have not seen any question to warrant of issuance of directions to SHO concerned for registration of F.I.R all the officials are posted at same police station, where the incident had taken place, accordingly application in hand merits no consideration, hence at this stage same is rejected."

                   I do not see any justification in holding that since there are controversial facts, therefore, there is no justification in lodging the F.I.R.  I, therefore, set aside the impugned order and direct the applicant to appear before the concerned officer for recording her statement under Section 154, Cr.P.C and if a cognizable offence is made out, her F.I.R be registered and shall proceed strictly in accordance with law.

                   The criminal miscellaneous application is disposed of accordingly.

                                                                                                JUDGE