MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN Versus State
ORDER
SHAHNAWAZ TARIQ, J.--- Through captioned Criminal Revision Application, applicant Muhammad Hussain son of Ali Nawaz Leghari has impugned order dated 25.11.2011, passed by the Court of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Badin, whereby his application under sections 22-A and 22-B, Cr.P.C. was dismissed.
2. Relevant facts narrated in instant revision are that applicant is owner of land bearing Survey No.30, admeasuring 0-34 ghunta, situated in Deh Khorhadi, Taluka and District Badin, which was purchased by him through registered sale deed from his mother. Applicant is in peaceful possession of the said and and also cultivating the same, which is situated near Seerani Town. Accused persons filed Civil Suit regarding said land against the applicant which was dismissed as withdrawn. Then accused again filed another Civil Suit but its plaint was also rejected by the Court. On 28.10.2011, at about 09:30 a.m., applicant went to his said land, where accused persons had sat-up Cattle Market upon which he raised objections and also shown them orders passed by the Courts, but they used derogatory language and took out pistols from folds of their Shalwars and pointed out towards the applicant in order to kill him. Accused persons extended threats for dire consequences, caught hold his collar and pushed him but he was rescued by Muneer Ahmed and Abdul Ghafoor Leghari. Applicant approached concerned police for lodgment of FIR but police due to influence of proposed accused, did not register FIR, thus he filed Criminal Miscellaneous Application before learned Sessions Judge/Justice of Peace, Badin which was transferred to the Court of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Badin for its disposal according to law. Learned trial Court called report from SHO and issued notice to proposed accused for their appearance and they filed their written objections and learned trial Court dismissed said application. hence instant criminal revision application.
3. Learned counsel for applicant contended that learned Justice of Peace did not appreciate the material placed by the applicant properly while hearing miscellaneous application filed by him; that learned Court had called report from SHO and also issued notice to proposed accused without any justification; that proposed accused issued threats for dire consequences to the applicant in presence of witnesses and they also caught his collar but such fact has not been considered by the learned Justice of Peace while passing impugned order, hence same may be set aside and SHO concerned may be directed to lodge FIR against proposed accused. Learned counsel relied upon 2013 PCr.LJ 117.
4. While controverting the above submissions, learned Counsel for proposed accused vehemently contended that applicant has managed a false story against the respondents only to humiliate them and even the allegations leveled by the applicant could not be believed, as all the respondents were duly armed with pistols and applicant was empty handed but no injury was caused to him nor aerial firing was made by them to create any harassment.
5. Learned D.P.G. contended that no cognizable offence has been made out from the averments of the FIR and even on the day of alleged occurrence and thereafter during period of 05 years, the proposed accused did not caused any harm to the applicant, hence instant revision is liable to be dismissed. He relied upon PLD 2014 SC 753.
6. Heard arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and examined the material available on record.
7. Perusal of record emanates that parties are disputed over the land in question. Initially, proposed accused persons raised their claim over land in question and filed Civil Suit No.31/2009 before the Court of learned II-Civil Judge, Badin, which was later on dismissed as withdrawn. Subsequently, proposed accused persons again filed Civil Suit No.05/2010 (Ali Akber v. Govt of Sindh and others), but plaint of said suit was rejected under Order VII, Rule 11, C.P.C. by the Court of learned District Judge, Badin in Civil Revision Application No.139/2011 vide order dated 10.05.2011, against which, proposed accused also filed Constitution Petition No.D-1263/2011 before the High Court of Sindh Circuit Bench Hyderabad. Allegedly, on 28.10.2011, proposed accused had sat- up a Cattle Market to which applicant raised objections but accused used derogatory language and they took out pistols and pointed out towards the applicant in order to kill him. Accused extended threats for dire consequences and caught hold his collar and pushed him, however, in the meantime Muneer Ahmed and Abdul Ghafoor Leghari intervened and rescued the applicant from proposed accused. Applicant instead of approaching the concerned police for lodgment of FIR had directly filed criminal miscellaneous application and the Court of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge/Justice of Peace, Badin being dissatisfied with allegations leveled by the applicant had called report from concerned SHO and also issued notice to proposed accused and they filed their objections, and ultimately after hearing the parties, said application was dismissed.
8. It is significant to mention that at the time of the alleged incident, applicant was alone and empty handed, while proposed accused persons were duly armed with pistols and they pointed out their pistols towards the applicant, but they neither caused him any injury to applicant nor made any aerial firing though applicant was entirely at the mercy of proposed accused persons and it was not difficult for them to maltreat him. Moreover, after the alleged incident five years have been passed but neither proposed accused have committed any crime nor even made any attempt to cause any harm to the applicant. Conversely, applicant has stated that land in question is under cultivation, then allegations for setting up of Cattle Market on the said land is not possible, and even no proof regarding the establishment of Cattle Market has been placed, hence mere verbal allegations could not convince a prudent mind being self-contradictory. Furthermore, applicant has an alternate remedy to file direct criminal complaint but he did not avail such remedy which reflects that applicant is bent upon to lodge FIR with clear object to cause harassment to the proposed accused only to humiliate them to settle his account of animosity, as they had filed Civil Suits regarding the land in question.
9. It is incumbent upon the Justice of Peace that while scanning the averments of criminal application for registration of FIR, he should apply his judicial mind being a Senior Judicial Officer and adjudge the entire set of allegations prudently. Justice of Peace is not bound to issue direction to police in each and every case to record the statement of complainant if apparently no cognizable offence is made out or complaint is tainted with malice and based with ulterior motives, he can call report from SHO concerne to examine the authenticity of the allegations leveled by the complainant. Justice of Peace should also keep in his mind this aspect that any direction issued unnecessarily or in routine manners shall cause humiliation, harassment and mental agony to the proposed accused and it would take years to conclude the criminal trial of the case arisen out of any FIR.
10. For the facts and circumstances referred above, applicant has failed to make out any case for taking cognizance of any offence nor any illegality has been committed by the learned Justice of Peace while passing impugned order which does not call for any interference by this Court, hence same stands maintained. Consequently, instant criminal revision application stands dismissed. However, applicant is at liberty to avail alternate remedy by filing direct complaint if he is advised so.
JK/M-189/Sindh Revision dismissed.