AMANAT MASIH vs ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, KASUR and 4 others
This constitutional petition arises from an order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kasur, acting as an ex-officio Justice of Peace, whereby the petitioner's application for registration of a criminal case under sections 22-A and 22-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 was dismissed, and a concurrent direction was issued to the Station House Officer to initiate proceedings under section 182 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 against the petitioner for lodging a false report. The core legal question addressed is whether an ex-officio Justice of Peace possesses the jurisdiction under section 22-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 to direct the initiation of proceedings under section 182 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 upon dismissing a petition for case registration. The Lahore High Court held that the jurisdiction of an ex-officio Justice of Peace under section 22-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 is strictly confined to issuing directions for the registration of criminal cases, transfer of investigations, or addressing police neglect, and does not extend to ordering prosecution under section 182 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. Consequently, the petition was partially accepted, setting aside the offending direction.
- Does an ex-officio Justice of Peace have the jurisdiction under section 22-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 to direct the initiation of proceedings under section 182 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 against a petitioner upon dismissing a petition for registration of a criminal case?
- What are the statutory powers of an ex-officio Justice of Peace under section 22-A(6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 22-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 22-A(6), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 22-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 182, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
TARIQ SHAMIM, J--- Through this petition, petitioner Amanat Masih has assailed the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kasur/Justice of Peace, dated 29-7-2006, whereby on the application filed by the petitioner for registration of a case against the respondents arrayed therein under sections 22-A and 22-B, Cr.P.C., the learned Justice of Peace after passing the dismissal order directed the S.H.O. Concerned to initiate proceedings under section 182, P.P.C. Against the petitioner.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the order of the learned Court was beyond the purview of section 22-A, Cr.P.C. Which did not confer any jurisdiction on the Court to give such a direction, hence the same was illegal, unlawful and coram non judice, therefore, liable to be set aside.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No,4 has vehemently opposed the petition whereas the learned Additional Advocate-General has conceded that to the extent of the direction given by the Court regarding initiating proceedings under section 182,P.P.C. Against the petitioner was illegal and not sustainable under the law.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and the learned Additional Advocate-General.
5. It would be appropriate to reproduce section 22-A(6), Cr.P.C. For easy reference:-- 22-A(6). An ex-officio Justice of the Peace may issue appropriate direction to the police authorities concerned on a complaint regarding:
(i) non-registration of criminal case;
(ii) transfer of investigation from one police officer to another; and
(iii) neglect, failure or excess committed by a police authority in relation to its function and duties."
6. A perusal of the provision of law reproduced ibid reveals that the learned ex-officio Justice of Peace could only pass an order directing registration of a criminal case if a cognizable offence was made out from the application or decline the same. The direction given to the S.H.O. By the learned ex officio Justice of Peace to initiate proceedings against the petitioner under section 182, P.P.C. Is beyond the purview of section 22-A, Cr.P.C., hence in excess of the jurisdiction conferred upon him under the law.
7. For what has been discussed above, this writ petition is partially accepted and the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Justice of Peace dated 29-7-2006 to the extent of the direction given to the S.H.O. To initiate proceedings under section 182, P.P.C. Against the petitioner is set aside.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Cited by 7 cases
- Shoaib Sohail vs Ex-officio Justice of Peace and others 2023 LHC 6369
- Baba Sufi MUHAMMAD IQBAL vs JUSTICE OF PEACE/ADDITIONAL SESSIONS 2020 MLD 1
- SHAH MUHAMMAD vs ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE and otherss 2014 YLR 1489
- MUHAMMAD ASHRAF vs JUSTICE OF PEACE/ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, 2014 P Cr. L J 343
- ASIF GOHAR vs Sardar AMAN KHAN and 2 others 2010 YLR 2219
- Ghazi KHALID HUSSAIN FAKHAR vs STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION 2010 YLR 1598
- Umair Afzal vs The Additional Sessions Judge_Justice of Peace, Bahawalpur and three others 2023 LHC 1865