ABDUL SATTAR Versus THE STATE

1. This application has been filed on behalf of applicant Haji Abdul Sattar son of Abdul Ghafoor, for quashment of proceedings under section 561-A, Cr.P.C., initiated against him under section 14, Sindh Crimes Control Act, 1975 by S.D.M., Jamshed Quarters on the basis of a report submitted before him by S.H.O., P.S. Gulzar Hijri.

2. The brief facts as mentioned in the report of the police are that the applicant is a habitual offender indulging in land grabbing and also commits riots creating law and order problem for the area police. It is further alleged in the report that the applicant has no ostensible source of income and that he is so dangerous and desperate that his remaining at large will be hazardous to the general public. A list of cases and witnesses was also attached alongwith the report.

3. The learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the provisions of sections 5 and 6 of the Sindh Crimes Control Act have not been complied with, as such initiation of proceedings against the applicant under section 14, Sindh Crimes Control Act by the S.D.M. is not in accordance with the provisions of law and as such continuation of the proceedings on the basis of the report would be abuse of the process of the Court. He has further contended that the applicant is a social worker and with his efforts a village known Sikandar Goth was regularised by the Government of Sindh. He has further contended that due to regularisation of this village, land gabbers and the police of the area got annoyed with the present applicant and on account of this the applicant was involved in various cases by the police of the area. He has further contended that according to Sindh Crimes Control Act it is only the Tribunal which can exercise jurisdiction under the Act; whereas in the present case the orders have been passed and the action has been taken by the Assistant Commissioner and S.D.M., Jamshed Quarters, Karachi and even the report of the police is addressed to the S.D.M. Jamshed Quarters, District East, Karachi and the same has not been filed in his capacity as a Tribunal under the Sindh Crimes Control Act.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the State has frankly conceded that a vague report has been submitted by the S.H.O. before the S.D.M. and not before the Tribunal. According to him, there has been wrong exercise of jurisdiction by the Assistant Commissioner and S.D.M. and the continuation of the proceedings against the applicant will be abuse of the process of the Court.

5. I have gone through the entire record which has been placed before me and I find that the report is vague and does not mention the acts with which the applicant has been charged nor there are details of time and place of such acts.

6. It has been held in PLD 1980 Kar. 267 that a report submitted by the police officer being vague lacking in material particulars without detailing time and place of the acts charged, but only giving by way of a particular list of cases in which the petitioner was challaned, it was observed that mere list of cases in which the petitioner was challaned cannot be substituted for statement of particulars to be given under Section 5 and taking cognizance of such report was held not proper.

7. In numerous cases it has been held by this Court that cognizance under the Act cannot be sustained in absence of completion of the requirements of Sections 5 and 6 of Sindh Crimes Control Act. So far as the present applicant is concerned even proceedings have not been initiated by the C Tribunal which is required to be done under the Act.

8. Considering the above facts and circumstances, I had quashed the proceedings, by my short order dated 7-0-1993 and these are the reasons for I the same. Bail bonds furnished by the applicant stand discharged.

9. N.H.Q./A-1426/K Proceedings quashed