2014 PLP 2019 (YLR)

SHAHNAWAZ TARIQ, J.

Through this application under Order VI Rule 17 C.P.C. r/w section 151 C.P.C. bearing M.A. No.9813 of 2013, the petitioner has sought amendment in the prayer clause as under:-- "(A) That this Honourable court may be pleased to direct to the respondent No.3 to record the statement of petitioner as per his verbatim and if any cognizable offence made out then same will be inserted in the book of section 154 Cr.P.C.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that on 8-10-2013 at 4.30 p.m., the respondents along with other police officials entered into the house of the petitioner, inquired about his brother Muhammad Hanif, who was not available at that time, thereafter, they destroyed the house hold articles and also took away cash and certain articles, hence they have committed a cognizable offence. The respondents continued their harassment to the petitioner regarding his above named brother, who is not involved in any criminal activity. He further contended that this court has concurrent jurisdiction for issuance of directions for registration of F.I.R., to the respondent No.3, S.H.O. Police Station Naseem Nagar Qasimabad Hyderabad regarding offence committed by the proposed accused.

3. Learned Assistant A.G. vehemently denied the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. He undertakes that the official respondents will not harass the petitioner and his family members and will act in accordance with law. He submits that the respondents Nos.2, 3 and 4 have filed their respective comments in the above petition and the respondent No.3 S.H.O. Police Station Naseem Nagar has also filed Photostat copies of the F.I.Rs. in compliance of order of this court, therefore, purpose of filing this petition has been served but the petitioner in order to cause harassment to the official respondents has filed instant application for amending the prayer of main petition for issuance of such directions, for which he may approach the concerned Justice of Peace in first instance. Learned Additional Advocate General Sindh categorically stated that the official respondents have not harassed the petitioner or his family members nor they intend to do so.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Advocate General Sindh and have perused the available record.

5. From perusal of record, it transpires that the petitioner filed instant petition with following prayers;- (a) Direct the respondents to produce the list of cases, if any, in which the brother of the petitioner Muhammad Hanif is involved. (b) Direct the respondent No.1 to restrain the respondent No.2 whereas direct the respondent No.2 to restrain the respondent No.3 from harassing the petitioner and his family members/ relatives in any form or manifestation and treat them like respectable citizens as guaranteed in the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan; (c) To direct the respondents Nos.1 and 2 to provide legal protection of life, honour, prestige and property to the petitioner and his family members against the sheer high handedness of the respondents Nos.3 and 4. (d) Direct the respondents Nos.3 and 4 to furnish statements before this Honourable Court that they will not harass the petitioner, his brother Muhammad Hanif and his other family members in any form or manifestation.

6. Pursuant to notices issued by this court vide order dated 21-10-2013, the learned Additional Advocate General Sindh filed comments on behalf of respondents Nos.2, 3 and 4 and also placed on record, the Photostat copies of F.I.Rs. No.14 of 2013, 93/2008, 94/2008 and 95/2008 registered against the brother of the petitioner namely Muhammad Hanif, copies whereof have already been provided to the learned counsel for the petitioner. Perusal of the prayer clause made in the petition, it appears that purpose of instant petition has already been achieved as the respondents Nos. 2, 3 and 4 have already denied the allegations of causing harassment to the petitioner and his family members and also gave undertaking that they will not harass them and will act in accordance with law. I am convinced with the contention of learned Assistant A.G. that the petitioner is at liberty to approach the concerned court/ Justice of Peace first, for redressal of his grievance and even he has also an alternate remedy of filing Direct complaint against the proposed accused if so advised, therefore, instant application being devoid of merits is dismissed.

7. Since very purpose of this petition has already been served as discussed above, therefore, keeping the petition pending would not yield any result. Accordingly, instant petition stands disposed of. However, respondents Nos.1 to 4 are strictly directed not to cause any kind of harassment to the petitioner and his family members and will act strictly in accordance with law. HBT/A-35/Sindh Order accordingly.