AJAL KHAN vs BAHARUDDIN KERIO and 5 otherss
This criminal revision application challenges the order of the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Nawabshah, which dismissed a direct complaint filed by the applicant under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The trial court had dismissed the complaint based solely on a police Roznamcha entry justifying the police action against an absconding accused. The applicant contended that the trial court ignored substantial evidence presented during the preliminary inquiry, specifically regarding the illegal arrest and subsequent release of several other individuals during the same police raid. Upon review, the High Court found that the trial court had acted in a slipshod manner by overlooking material evidence and failing to consider the applicant's preliminary inquiry findings. Furthermore, the Additional Advocate General could not controvert the fact that illegal arrests had occurred. Consequently, the High Court set aside the impugned order, restored the complaint to the trial court's record, and directed the trial court to proceed with the matter in accordance with the law.
- Can a trial court dismiss a direct complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 without considering the evidence adduced during a preliminary inquiry?
- Is a police Roznamcha entry sufficient grounds to dismiss a private complaint alleging illegal police action without further judicial inquiry?
- Section 200, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. ' ANWAR ZAHEER TAMALI, J.---Mr. Irfan Ahmed Qureshi, learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the direct complaint under section 200, Cr.P.C., filed by the Applicant, was dismissed by the Court of IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Nawabshah on the sole ground that Entry No,20 in the Roznamcha of Police Station Tangwani had clearly disclosed that action taken by the police party to apprehend the absconding accused in Crime No, 105 of 2003, under section 302, P.P.C. Of Police Station A-Section Kandhkot, District Kashmore was a justified action. He submits that while holding so the whole evidence adduced by the Applicant in the proceedings of preliminary enquiry was ignored by the learned trial Court in a slipshod manner, and even the Entry No,21, showing the arrest of 4/5 other persons by the raiding police party was overlooked. He further takes reference to the reply of this Criminal Revision Application submitted by Respondent No,1, wherein he has also admitted that at the time when they had raided the houses of the Applicant and others for arrest of proclaimed offender Arbello, he had also arrested 4/5 other persons, who were later on released and not challaned in the crime.
2. ' Mr. Masood A. Noorani, Additional Advocate General Sindh, when confronted with these facts, is unable to controvert that illegal arrest of 4/5 other persons had taken place at the hands of Respondents, who were among the police party, which had raided the house of the Applicant on 14-3-2006.
3. ' I have carefully considered the submissions of learned counsel and perused the impugned as well as the evidence led by the applicant's side during P.E., which shows that substantial material was brought on record by the Applicant for bringing his complaint under section 200 Cr.P.C. On record against the Respondents.
4. ' Accordingly, the impugned order, dated 3-6-2006 is set aside and the complaint of the Applicant under section 200, Cr.P.C. Is brought on record of the trial Court with directions for further proceedings in the matter in accordance with law.
5. ' This Criminal Revision Application stands disposed of in the above terms.