Muhammad Saeed and another vs The State and another
This petition challenges a summoning order dated 09.11.2015 issued by a trial court in a private complaint filed by the respondent, Mst. Nasim Mai, regarding the murder of her husband. The core legal question concerns the validity of the trial court's decision to summon the accused in a private complaint after a previous FIR regarding the same incident had already been investigated, challaned, and proceeded to trial against a different set of accused, and after a prior attempt to register a second FIR for the same occurrence had been set aside by the High Court. The court examined whether the private complaint and the preliminary evidence provided sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused. The holding affirms the trial court's summoning order, finding that the oral and documentary evidence produced by the complainant, including statements and exhibits, established a prima facie case sufficient to summon the accused for the alleged offences under the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The principle laid down is that a trial court may summon accused persons in a private complaint if the preliminary evidence, both oral and documentary, provides sufficient material to establish a prima facie case, even if previous legal proceedings regarding the same incident involving different accused have occurred.
- Can a trial court summon accused persons in a private complaint based on preliminary evidence if a prior FIR regarding the same incident has already been challaned against different accused?
- Does the existence of a prior investigation and challan in a criminal case bar the filing of a private complaint regarding the same incident?
- What is the threshold of evidence required for a trial court to issue a summoning order in a private complaint?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 365, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 341, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 22-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 22-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. ' CH. MUSHTAQ AHMAD, J. --- Through this petition, validity of summoning order dated 09.11.2015 has been called in question which was passed in private complaint titled Mst. Nasim Mai. Vs. Raham etc. Under Sections 302/324/365/341/148/149 PPC filed on 28.04.2015 in respect of an incident dated 08.08.2014 wherein Mansoor Ahmad son of petitioner Muhammad Saeed and husband of respondent No,2 Mst. Nasim Mai, was done to death. Petitioner, father of the deceased lodged FIR No,356/2014 at Police Station Kot Chutta District Rajanpur against two accused namely Allah Yar son of Jumma and Wasim son of lqbal. Investigation was conducted and on its completion challan was submitted before trial court against above mentioned two accused persons. Charge was framed against them on 15.10.2014 whereafter statements of the prosecution witnesses were also recorded. Mst. Nasim Mai, respondent, then moved a petition under Section 22-A,B Cr.P.0 before learned Justice of Peace seeking direction to S.H.O to register second FIR regarding the same incident against different set of accused namely Raham, Nawaz sons of Haider, Manzoor and Juma sons of Raham and one Maqsood Ahmad son of Allah Bakhsh alleging that in fact they had murdered Mansoor Ahmad, her husband and not the accused nominated in the FIR lodged at the instance of father of deceased. Learned Justice of Peace allowed the petition directing the S.H.O to register second FIR vide order dated 23.12.2014 which was challenged by the proposed accused Maqsood Ahmad in writ petition No,157/15. The above writ petition along with writ petition No,171/2015 filed by Mst. Nasim Mai for implementation of the same order came up for hearing before this Court on 08.04.2015 whereby the order passed by learned Justice of Peace dated 23.12.2014 was set-aside. Thereafter, Mst. Nasim Mai filed private complaint in which after recording cursory statements, the trial court summoned the accused vide order dated 09.11.2015, operative para of the same is reproduced as under- "Mst. Nasim Mai, the complainant herself appeared as PW-1, Dildar Parvaiz appeared as PW-2 and Muhammad Aqeel appeared as PW3. On behalf of the complainant, private complaint as Ex.PA, copy of postmortem report of deceased as Ex.PB. Attested copy of FIR No,356/13 u/s:324/34 PPC (added 302 PPC) Ex. PC, copy of writ petition No,171/2015 Ex.PD and copy of order dated 08.04.2015 in writ petition No,157/15 Ex.PE were produced in documentary evidence. The oral as well as documentary preliminary evidence produced by the complainant supported and corroborated the contents of the complaint Ex.PA. Prima facie, there is sufficient material on record to proceed against the accused for the offences u/s:302/341/148/149 PPC. Hence, the accused are summoned for 20.11.2015. The complainant is also directed to furnish