MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN Versus ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE/JUSTICE OF PEACE, D.G. Khan

ORDER

SYED EJAZ HUSSAIN SHAH, J.--- Through this constitutional petition, the petitioner Muhammad Hussain has prayed for setting aside the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dera Ghazi Khan/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, dismissing his application for the issuance of a direction to the S.H.O., Police Station Kala, District Dera Ghazi Khan/respondent No.2 to register a criminal case against Suleman, Ismaeel and Qasim, respondents Nos.3 to 5. He has prayed for the issuance of a direction to respondent No.2 for recording his statement and registering a criminal case against respondents Nos.3 to 5.

2. The facts leading to this petition are that the petitioner Muhammad Hussain filed an application under section 22-A, Cr.P.C. maintaining that on 28-8-2010, at 7-30 p.m. he was returning to his house along with Muhammad Moosa on a Honda Motorcycle when Suleman respondent No.3 armed with a Kalashnikov, Ismail respondent No.4 equipped with a pistol and Qasim respondent No.5 empty-handed stopped them at gun-point. The petitioner and his companion apprehending danger to their life, delivered their motorcycle to the aforesaid assailants who were accompanied by an unknown person whereafter respondents Nos.3 and 5 drove away the snatched motorcycle whereas Ismail respondent No.4 and the unknown assailant left the scene of occurrence on their own motorcycle. The occurrence was reported to 1124 by the petitioner through a telephonic call made from his mobile phone. The police came to the spot, raided at the house of Muhammad Suleman and Ismail respondents Nos.3 and 4 who fled away leaving the motorcycle of the petitioner but the police did not register the case. The petitioner prayed for the issuance of a direction to the S.H.O., Police Station Kala, District Dera Ghazi Khan, and the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dera Ghazi Khan/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, seized of the application called for a report of the local police which was received to the effect that the petitioner had himself left the motorcycle near the house of the accused in order to involve them in a false case. After considering the said report, the learned Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, dismissed the application observing that the petitioner might file a private complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that since the contents of the complaint moved before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, made out the commission of a cognizable offence, therefore, the Ex-Officio Justice of Peace had no alternative except to order for the registration of a case. He has placed reliance on "Muhammad Bashir v. S.H.O. and others" (PLD 2007 Supreme Court 539).

4. Arguments heard. Record perused.

5. The learned Ex-Officio Justice of Peace had called for a report from the S.H.O. which was received to the effect that the petitioner Muhammad Hussain had got registered a murder case against Ghulam Qasim, respondent No.5 at Police Station Kot Mubarak in which Ghulam Qasim was convicted and sentenced to seven years' imprisonment who was released on bail and in fact the petitioner wanted to get a case of dacoity registered against his opponents and he had himself parked his motorcycle near the house of his opponents/respondents Nos.3 to 5 in order to implicate them falsely in a case of dacoity and there was no grain of truth in the allegations levelled by him. This is not disputed that the petitioner Mohammad Hussain had lodged a murder case against Ghulam Qasim respondent No.5 at Police Station Kot Mubarak in which Ghulam Qasim, was convicted and sentenced to seven years' imprisonment who later on secured his bail. As held in "Muhammad Mushtaq v. Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore and others" (2008 YLR 2301) the learned Ex-Officio Justice of Peace before whom an application under section 22-A(6), Cr.P.C. is moved seeking a direction to the S.H.O. concerned for registration of a case is not expected and required to allow the request of the complainant mechanically, blindly and without application of legal mind and he is competent to examine the complaint obviously with full application of legal mind and is not supposed to accept and believe the same as gospel truth. In the cited case also notices were issued to the respondents and report from the local police was called for. It has been held in "Habibullah v. Political Assistant, Dera Ghazi Khan and others" (2005 SCMR 951) that the High Court was under no obligation to issue a direction for the registration of a case in each and every case irrespective of the facts and circumstances which could call for exercise of judicial restraint in turning down such requests in view of the conduct of the party besides considering that adequate remedy in the form of private complaint was available to the complainant. In the aforesaid case, the petitioner Habibullah had filed Writ Petition No.9398 of 2002 under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, before this court for seeking a direction from the court to the S.H.O. to register a criminal case against some respondents for the commission of offences in which report and parawise comments were called for from the S.H.O. and after perusal of the report and para-wise comments which were to the effect that the allegations levelled in the petition were false and a counterblast of another case, the petition was dismissed, which order was assailed through a petition for leave to appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan which application was dismissed by holding that the High Court was under no obligation to issue a direction for registration of F.I.R. and the petitioner had failed to point out any improper exercise of the discretion by this court.

6. The impugned order has been passed by the learned Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, with full application of judicious mind after getting the report/comments of the local police and the same is a speaking order which does not call for any interference by this court, hence, the same is upheld. This petition has no merits, hence, is dismissed in limine.

H.B.T./M-284/L Petition dismissed.