Mir Saifullah Mugheri vs Station House Officer, P.S Hyderi and others
This criminal miscellaneous application was filed to assail the order of the Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, Larkana, whereby the applicant's request for directions to register an FIR regarding the alleged theft of dowry articles by his brothers and nephews was dismissed on the ground that the matter involved a civil dispute over inherited property. The core legal question was whether the Justice of Peace erred in refusing to direct the registration of the FIR under Sections 22-A and 22-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The Sindh High Court held that where the police have already negated the applicant's version and given adverse comments, no impartial investigation can be expected from them, making a direct private complaint an adequate and proper remedy. The court dismissed the application, laying down the principle that where a civil dispute exists and police are unlikely to conduct an impartial investigation, the appropriate recourse is to file a direct complaint before the trial court rather than seeking constitutional or discretionary remedies for FIR registration.
- Whether a Justice of Peace is justified in refusing to order the registration of an FIR when the dispute between the parties is primarily of a civil nature concerning inherited property?
- Is a direct private complaint considered an adequate remedy when the local police have already expressed an adverse opinion against the complainant's version?
- Can the High Court decline to interfere with the order of the Justice of Peace refusing to direct the registration of an FIR under Section 22-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 22-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 22-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 22-A(6), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Article 199, Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
1. SHAMSUDDIN ABBASI, J.
2. Through Captioned Criminal Miscellaneous Application, applicant Mir Saifullah Mugheri has assailed the order dated 18.03.2024 passed by the learned 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana, in capacity of Ex-Officio Justice of peace, whereby an application filed by the applicant seeking directions to register his FIR against the proposed accused, was dismissed.
3. The applicant submitted that learned Justice of Peace has erred in Iaw and exercised discretion in favor of the proposed accused. He further added that the contents of application filed by the applicant under Sections 22-A and 22-B Cr.P.C, prima facie discloses the commission of a cognizable offense of stealing away dowry articles of his wife from the house by the proposed accused. Lastly, he prayed that his application may be allowed and respondent No.1 may be directed to record his statement.
4. Perusal of the impugned order reflects that the learned Ex-Officio/Justice of Peace while dismissing the application of applicant observed that applicant and proposed accused No.1 are brothers inter-se, whereas rest of proposed accused arc his nephews and that parties are disputing each other over inherited property and applicant wants to covert such civil dispute into criminal proceedings.
5. Further perusal of application, under Section 22-A(6), Cr.P.C also Shows that before filing of application to Ex-Officio/Justice of Peace, the applicant approached the concerned police but they refused to record his statement.
6. In these circumstances, when version of applicant has already been negated by the concerned police with regard to happening of the alleged incident in a fashion as disclosed by the applicant in his Application by refusing his to record statement, then what would be expected from the police if the FIR of the applicant is registered. As such, proper course for the applicant would be that of availing adequate remedy in shape of direct complaint.
7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hahibullah v. Political Assistant., Dera Ghazi Khan and others (2005 SCMR 951), has observed, that filing of private complaint could provide an equal adequate relief to the petitioner because he could lead the entire evidence himself before the trial Court and his grievance could be adequately redressed considering also the fact that respondent/SHO, who in the report and para-wise comments has mentioned adverse to the petitioner's case, therefore, it could not be expected from the concerned SHO that he would carry independent and impartial investigation in the case. It may be stated that under the provisions of Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan it was not obligatory for the High Court to issue writ in each case irrespective of the facts and circumstances which could call for exercise of judicial restraint in turning down the request for registration of FIR in view of the conduct of the party besides considering that adequate remedy in the form of private complaint being available to the petitioner.
8. In view of the above circumstances and the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. I am of the view that it would be appropriate for the applicant to institute a direct complaint before the Court having jurisdiction, where he could lead entire evidence himself and his grievance could be adequately redressed. With above observations, the application in hand being merit-less is dismissed.