TARIQ SHAFI Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH
ORDER
AFTAB AHMED GORAR, J.--- Through the instant petitions the petitioner has sought suspension of the orders dated 21.01.2017 and 15.02.2017 passed by District and Sessions Judge, Karachi-West.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that both the orders dated 21.01.2017 and 15.02.2017 passed by District and Sessions Judge, Karachi-West are illegal, ultra vires. He further submitted that the orders impugned herein were passed on an application of the respondent No. 6 after submission of report under section 155, Cr.P.C. which is improper, illegal and incorrect as such liable to be set aside. He contended that respondent No.4 has rightly submitted that report under section 155, Cr.P.C. after giving his fair, just and proper opinion that from the facts of the complaint no cognizable offence is made out hence the question of lodging of FIR in a non-cognizable offence does not arise. He further contended that respondent No.2 has wrongly given his findings as it is settled principle of law that the respondent No.2 is incumbent to pass fair and just decision which should be speaking on and while scrutinizing the entire report but not on an application of either party.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent No.6 submitted that despite several visits of the respondent No.6 at the Police Station concerned, the SHO has failed to comply the order passed by the Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace dated 28.03.2016 whereby SHO was directed to record the statement of respondent No.6 and if no cognizable offence made out then he has to submit his report under section 155, Cr.P.C. He further submitted that the SHO was avoiding to comply with the order mentioned above. He contended that after framing of the charge evidence of complainant has also been recorded by the trial court and at this stage quashment of FIR/Proceedings is not permissible.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
5. Record shows that the petitioner had filed C.Ps. Nos. 1325/2016 and 1326/2016 before this court wherein it was ordered that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner. The said order was passed only to prevent the petitioner from coercive action and not from the lawful proceedings. The Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace directed SHO concerned to register FIR on the complaint of the complainant. It was further observed by the Ex. Officio Justice of Peace that though the police is required to investigate every allegation of commission of a cognizable offence a person named as an accused cannot be arrested unless some tangible material is available. It may not be out of place to mention here that when a cognizable offence is reported by a person the SHO of the concerned Police Station is bound to register FIR under the mandatory provisions of section 154, Cr.P.C. Police was under a statutory duty under section 154, Cr.P.C. to register a case, where a cognizable offence appeared to have been committed; and was statutorily bound to investigate a cognizable offence. There is no provision in any law, including, sections 154 and 155 of Cr.P.C., which authorizes an Officer Incharge of a Police Station to hold any enquiry to assess the correctness or falsity of the information received by him before complying with the mandatory requirement of reducing the information into writing irrespective of the fact whether such an information was true or not. No illegality or defect has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the exercise of jurisdiction by District and Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace while passing the impugned order. It may not be out of place to mention here that a Sessions Judge acting at Ex-officio Justice of the Peace can always issue appropriate direction to the police authorities on a complaint regarding non-registration of criminal case or negligence or failure by police authorities in relation to its functions. Reference in this respect may he made to the case reported in PLD 2005 Kar 285. In view of the above discussion I am of the considered view that order impugned herein are well reasoned and do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity. Consequently, the same are maintained and all the captioned petitions are dismissed.
ADN/T-5/Sindh Petitions dismissed.