Pir ABDUL QAYYUM SHAH Versus S.H.O.

ORDER

This petition under section 439, Cr.P.C. has been directed against the order, dated 22‑5‑2004 passed by a earned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan in his capacity as Justice of Peace whereby he dismissed the application moved by the petitioner under section 22‑A, Cr.P.C. for a direction to the S.H.O. Police Station Budhla Santt to register a case against Muhammad Nawaz and three others (respondents Nos.2 to 5). The learned Additional Sessions Judge after obtaining a report from the S.H.O. concerned declined to order for the registration of case, however, he directed the petitioner to avail alternate remedy by filing a private complaint.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the allegations levelled in the complaint disclosed the commission of the cognizable offence and the S.H.O. was under a legal obligation under section 154, Cr.P.C. to register a case against the accused, as such, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has failed to exercise his powers by declining to pass the direction sought for.

3. I have considered the arguments Pitt forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

4. Part II‑A, B and C of Chapter II of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1860, deals with the Constitution of Criminal Courts of various classes, whereas the office of Justice of Peace is made under section 22‑A of Part II E of Chapter II, Cr.P.C. which empowers the Provincial Government to appoint any suitable person as Justice of Peace for a local area to be specified in the notification. The office of Justice of Peace is not a Court as envisaged under section 6, Cr.P.C. Through an amendment of section 25, Act V of 1898, by means of Ordinance No. CXXXI of 2002, the Sessions Judges were also invested with the powers of nominate Additional Sessions Judges as Justices of the Peace within and for whole of the District of the Province in which they are serving. Through the same amendment subsection (6) in section 22‑A was added whereby the Justices of the Peace were empowered to issue appropriate directions to the Police Authorities on a complaint regarding:‑‑

(i) Non‑registration of a 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 functions and duties.

When an Additional Sessions Judge entertains all application tinder section 22‑A, Cr.P.C. he does not act as inferior Criminal Court within the meaning of section 435, Cr.P.C. The impugned order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge is in fact an order passed by a Justice of Peace under sections 22‑A and 25, Cr.P.C. which is administrative or supervisory in nature and not amenable to the revisional jurisdiction of this Court. This revision petition fails and is hereby dismissed.

N.H.Q./A‑251/L Petition dismissed.