2008 PLP 573 (MLD)

TARIQ SHAMIM, J.

This single order will dispose of Writ Petition No. 11721 of 2007 and Writ Petition No. 10691 of 2007 as in both the petitions a prayer to the effect of registration of a case against respondents Nos.1 and 3 and quashing of case F.I.R. No.256 of 2007, dated 25-7-2007 for offence under section 6 of the Punjab Prevention of Gambling Ordinance (No.VII) of 1978, section 216, P.P.C. and section 13 of Pakistan Arms Ordinance (No.XX) of 1965, registered with Police Station Kotwali, District Gujranwala, has been made.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners and others were deprived of cash as well as other valuable properties by respondents Nos. 1 and 3 who thereafter, falsely implicated the petitioners in the aforesaid case; petitioner Malik Muhammad Siddiq and two others filed a petition under sections 22-A and 22-B, Cr.P.C. for registration of a case against respondents Nos. 1 and 3 and others which was disposed of by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace Gujranwala, with a direction to the C.P.O. Gujranwala to proceed in the matter strictly in accordance with law vide order, dated 3-10-2007; that similarly petitioner Sufi Muhammad Junaid filed a petition under sections 22-A and 22-B, Cr.P.C. for registration of a criminal case against respondents Nos. 1 and 3 and other police officials which was forwarded to the S.H.O. concerned by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace with a direction to proceed in the matter in accordance with law vide order, dated 20-9-2007 and that in the given facts a case was warranted to be registered against the delinquent respondents, looted property was liable to be returned to the petitioners and the aforesaid case F.I.R. registered against the petitioners merited to be quashed.

3. Report and parawise comments were obtained from the S.H.O. Police Station Kotwali, District Gujranwala-respondent No:2 which revealed that on 25-7-2007 Muhammad Iqbal, Inspector/S.H.O. Police Station Peoples Colony, Gujranwala sent a Istigasa to the S.H.O. Police Station Kotwali, Gujranwala mentioning that while he and others police officers were in search of proclaimed offenders in the area of Railway Phhatak, Mujahidpura, he received secret information that one Malik Tariq, a proclaimed offender of case F.I.R. No. 353 of 2006 for offences under sections 302, 365, 201, 148 and 149, P.P.C. registered at Police Station Peoples Colony was present at the house of Sufi Muhammad Junaid (petitioner in Writ Petition No.10691 of 2007) and consequently, he along with police party conducted a raid at the house of Sufi Junaid and found that Sufi Junaid, Muhammad Iqrar, Muhammad Jamil, Muhammad Siddiq (petitioner in Writ Petition No. 11721 of 2007) and one Muhammad Riaz were busy in gambling. Both the petitioners as well as their co-accused were apprehended and the following were taken into possession by the police:- Rs. 49620, five daggers, four pistols .30-bore along with 8 magazines, one rifle .222 -bore along with 125 cartridges, 150 cartridges of .9 mm, two small swords, six cartridges of pistol .30 bore, 7 cartridges of .12-bore gun, 150 grams opium, one packet playing cards, 14 watches, two cameras, one cell phone Motorlla, one telescope, one tape recorder, one head phone, two gatras of pistols, three ladies bag, 2 screw drivers, 100 token, 3 ring ghaat, one artificial chain, one artificial Kara, 7 stone Nags. Apart from that two Motorcycles Honda 125 registration No. LOZ/7223 and one without number were taken into possession under section 550, Cr.P.C.

4. The F.I.R. was lodged and investigation commenced in which the petitioners as well as their co-accused were found to be fully implicated in the crime. The petitioners and others were sent to judicial lock-up on 26-7-2007 and challan in the case was prepared and sent to Court for trial on 19-8-2007. The application filed by petitioner Sufi Muhammad Junaid pursuant to the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge was entertained by the Investigating Officer who concluded that the .allegations levelled in the petition were false and baseless. The Investigating Officer further concluded that during the course of the investigation of the aforesaid F.I.R. the petitioner had not levelled any allegation as mentioned in the petition or the application submitted with the police and that the allegations levelled by the petitioners in the writ petitions were totally false and baseless. Along with parawise comments a list of criminal cases registered against petitioner Sufi Muhammad Junaid is appended which reveals that thirteen criminal cases have been registered against him from 1992 to 2007. From the foregoing the possibility of the petitioners making an endeavour to have a criminal case registered against the police officers in counterblast to the registration of aforementioned F.I.R. cannot be ruled out. Prima facie the allegations do not appear to be credible and consequently, no order can be passed for registration of a criminal case against respondents Nos. 1 and

3. Even otherwise, the matter involves a factual controversy which cannot be resolved by this Court in its constitutional jurisdiction. Needless to add that the petitioners have an equally efficacious remedy available to them by way of filing a private complaint against the respondents. 4A. Insofar as the prayer regarding quashing of the aforesaid F.I.R. is concerned, challan in the case has been submitted after finalization of investigation and, therefore, the petitioners have an alternate remedy available to them under the law by way of approaching the learned trial Court in the first instance. Further, quashing of the F.I.R. at this stage would amount to stifling the prosecution. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Col. Shah Sadiq v. Muhammad Ashiq and others (2006 SCMR 276) has held that quashing of an F.I.R. amounts to short circuiting the normal procedure of laws as provided under the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Police Rules.

5. For what has been stated above, I find no merit in these petitions which are dismissed in limine. H.B.T./M-621/L Petition dismissed.