2012 PLP 1919 (YLR)

SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J.

Through the instant criminal revision petition filed under section 439, Cr.P.C. Muhammad Amin/ petitioner has called into question the wires of impugned order dated 2-12-2011, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Depalpur, District Okara; whereby while dismissing the private complaint, the learned trial court had declined to summon the accused/respondents No.2 to 10.

2. Facts of the case; in brief, arising out of the instant petition are that on 3-4-2011 at about 4-00 p.m. the accused/ respondents Nos.2 to 9 while armed with firearm weapons trespassed into the house and they gave kick and fist blows to the petitioner and his wife Mst. Noor Elahi. They also torn clothes of spouse of the petitioner due to which she was denuded/naked. On the hue and cry raised by the petitioner and his wife, the other witnesses attracted to the spot and rescued them. On the application of the petitioner case F.I.R. No.258, dated 10-5-2011, offence under sections 354, 452, 148, 149, P.P.C., was lodged at Police Station Haveli Lakha against respondents Nos.2 to 9, however, during the course of investigation, the accused were declared innocent. Being dissatisfied with the conclusion drawn by respondent No.10, the petitioner filed private complaint in which after proceedings under section 202, Cr.P.C., the learned trial court recorded cursory evidence of the petitioner, his wife and other witnesses and thereafter vide order dated 2-12-2011, had declined to summon the accused/respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that contents of the complaint clearly spell out provisions of sec-tions 354-A, 452, 427, 506-B, 201, 148, 149, P.P.C., which fact of the case escaped notice of the learned trial court. Learned counsel vehemently contends that from the cursory statement of Mst. Noor Elahi wife of the petitioner recorded as P.W.2, ingredients of section 354-A, P.P.C., are fully made out and the learned trial court was not justified in observing that facts of the case do not attract the provisions of supra section. The order of the learned trial court, learned counsel for the petitioner urges, has been passed in a stereotype manner in utter disregard to the material available on the record. Learned counsel prays for setting aside the impugned order.

4. Learned Deputy Prosecutor General submits that prima facie in the cursory statement of Mst. Noor Elahi, ingredients of section 354-A, P.P.C., are made out.

5. I have heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Deputy Prosecutor-General and gone through the record available on file.

6. Admittedly after filing the complaint, on the direction of the learned trial court, proceedings under section 202, Cr.P.C. were carried out by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Depalpur, who vide order dated 13-6-2011 had opined that allegations levelled in the complaint were based on solid foundation. Moreover, in her cursory statement before the learned trial court, Mst. Noor Elahi had made following deposition:-- When above portion of cursory statement of Mst. Noor Elahi is scrutinized with care and caution prima facie ingredients of section 354-A, P.P.C., are attracted, which could not have been rebutted by learned trial court without sufficient material from the other side.

7. For the foregoing reasons, while allowing this petition the matter is remanded back to learned Additional Sessions Judge, Depalpur, who is directed to decide the matter afresh while going through the material available on the record and proceed in the matter strictly in accordance with law without being prejudiced from the findings made herein above.

8. Case remanded. M.W.A./M-132/L Case remanded.