2014 P Cr (PLP)
GHULAM ABBAS — Applicant Versus S.H.O. POLICE STATION DARRI and 2 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2014 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Sindh |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | GHULAM ABBAS — Applicant Versus S.H.O. POLICE STATION DARRI and 2 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2014 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2014 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Sindh bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2014 P Cr (PLP) (GHULAM ABBAS — Applicant Versus S.H.O. POLICE STATION DARRI and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Fida Hussain Shah, State counsel for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 22-A, 22-B & 154
Powers of Justice of Peace to issue directions for registration of case
Justice of Peace dismissed application of complainant under Ss. 22-A & 22-B, Cr.P.C.
Plea of complainant was that Justice of Peace did not consider his application and at first called report from Station House Officer concerned, which was unnecessary and unwarranted under the law; that Justice of Peace while deciding the application deeply went into merits and demerits of the case, when he was only supposed to form an opinion about the offence being cognizable or non-cognizable from the facts narrated; and that Justice of Peace was not required to issue notice to the accused or to police or to anybody else, and had to form his own independent opinion from the facts narrated to him
In view of the plea of the complainant, impugned order of Justice of Peace was set aside and concerned Station House Officer was directed to record statement of complainant, and if from the contents of his statement a cognizable offence was made out, then to enter the same into S. 154, Cr.P.C. book
Application was allowed accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
AFTAB AHMED GORAR, J.
The applicant has impugned Order dated 24-5-2013, passed by learned V-Additional Sessions Judge/Justice of Peace, Larkana, whereby he has dismissed an application under sections 22-A and 22-B, Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant for getting orders for registration of his F.I.R.
2. Learned counsel submits that, the applicant approached to SHO concerned for registration of F.I.R. in respect of an incident occurred on 30-4-2013, for extorting an amount of Rs.30,000 from him by the proposed accused, but he was refused, therefore, he approached Ex-Officio Justice of Peace concerned, by filing an application under sections 22-A and 22-B, Cr.P.C. Learned counsel further submitted that the contents of his application narrate facts of a cognizable offence, even then the Justice of Peace did not consider his application and at-first he called report from the SHO concerned, which is not necessary and unwarranted under the law. Learned counsel further submitted the Justice of Peace while deciding the application of the applicant has deeply gone into merits and demerits of the case, though he was only supposed to form an opinion about the offence being cognizable or non-cognizable from the facts narrated to him by the complainant orally or in writing and for such purpose, he is not required to issue notice to accused or to police officer or to anybody else; he has to form his own independent opinion from the facts narrated to him. Per learned counsel, the Station House Officer had absolutely no power to refuse to register the case if from the information/statement of complainant a cognizable offence was made out, and it was for the Investigating Officer to thresh out the truth during course of investigation. Learned counsel in support of his contentions relied upon PLD 2005 Karachi 621 and 2012 MLD 736.
3. On the other hand, learned State Counsel frankly conceded to the above submissions. Accordingly, in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and the dictum laid down in the cases (supra), the instant application stands allowed, and the impugned order dated 24-5-2013, is hereby set aside. The SHO concerned is directed to record statement of the applicant, and if from contents of his statement a cognizable offence is made out; enter it into 154, Cr.P.C. book and proceed in accordance with law. However, if during course of investigation the information furnished by the applicant in his statement is found false, then proceedings under relevant law may be initiated against him. MWA/G-26/K Application allowed.