1986 PLP 1108 (MLD)

(b) Criminal Procedure Lode (V of 1898) ‑‑‑S. 156(3)‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.452/323‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199‑‑Magistrate ordering Police to register counter‑case but Police reporting that no case was made out against complainant party‑‑Magistrate again passing an order of registration of case‑‑Constitutional petition‑‑Order passed by the Magistrate, held, amounted to a judicial order against which ordinary judicial remedy could be sought in first instance. Hasnat Ahmad Khan for Petitioner. Through the instant constitutional petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 22‑4‑1986 passed by respondent No.1, i.e. Resident Magistrate, Sillanwali, whereby he has directed respondent No.2, vii. S.H.O. P.S. Sillanwali, District Sargodha, to register a case against the petitioner on the basis of an application filed by respondent No.3.

2. It has been contended in the writ petition that the petitioner had gone to the.house of Wali Muhammad etc. to settle a mutual family dispute between Wali Muhammad and Ali Muhammad, respondent No.3, but during these course of negotiations, respondent No.3 abused the petitioner and asked him as to why he had come to their house. Partisans of Ali Muhammad also reached the spot armed with Sotas and gave beatings to him. He received injuries on different parts of his body and consequently a case under section 307/148/149, P.P.C. was registered against Ali Muhammad, Muhammad Aslam, Zafar Ahmad, Yousuf and Ahmad Sher. It has also been alleged that in the course of the above incident Muhammad Aslam‑‑and War Ahmad aforesaid also received minor injuries. On the basis of their injuries, respondent No.3 moved an application before respondent No.1 requesting him to pass an order for registration of a case under section 452/323, P.P.C. against the petitioner. The police originally reported that no case under section 452/323, P.P.C. was made out, but again through the impunged order, respondent No.1 directed the police to register a case.

3. It has been argued on behalf of the petitioner that the Resident Magistrate i.e. respondent No.1 had no jurisdiction to pass an order directing the S.H.O., P. S. Sillanwali, to register a case and, therefore, the impugned order was without jurisdiction and without lawful authority and thus a nullity in the eye of law.

4. The above contention raised on behalf of the petitioner has no force. By virtue of the provisions of section 156(3), Cr.P.C. the; Illaqa Magistrate could direct the police to register a case and t61 investigate into the same. The impunged order passed by the learned Resident Magistrate, Sillanwali, amounts to a judicial order passed by B him and the petitioner in the first instance should seek ordinary judicial remedy against the said order before the Appellate/Revisional Court. He c4nnot directly invoke the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court.

5. For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is not legally competent and is accordingly dismissed in limine. H.A.K. Constitutional petition dismissed.