1995 PLP 1436 (MLD)

Ashiq Raza for the State. Date of hearing: 8th March, 1995. This application has been filed under section 561‑A, Cr.P.C. for quashment of proceedings pending against the applicant under section 14 of Sindh Crimes Control Act in the Court of Tribunal and S.D.M., Eidgah, Karachi South. These proceedings were initiated on complaint made by S.H.O., Napier Police Station, Karachi alleging therein that the applicant by habit do the business of pimping of prostitution, and sell of Narcotic. It is further alleged that he has been challaned in 7 criminal cases out of which in two cases he was convicted, in one case acquitted by way of a compromise and in four cases he still facing trial. It is further alleged that applicant is a criminal and hazardous for the public. The learned S.D.M. ordered that the Statement of S.H.O. be recorded. Case was ordered to be registered and non‑bailable warrant issued against the applicant on 21‑7‑1993. Against this order the applicant has approached this Court for quashment of proceedings. The learned Advocate for the applicant contended that the allegations against the applicant are vague, and neither therein mention the place and time of incident; nor any specific instance is quoted in the report. So far list of the cases against the applicant are concerned, the learned Advocate contends that one case pertains to the year 1986 another to 1989 but in both these cases the applicant has been acquitted in appeal. For remaining cases which are pending against the applicant, he contends that he is presumed to be innocent till proved guilty. He further contends that even in four cases which are pending against the applicant the S.H.O. has not mentioned the place and time of incident, and facts of the allegations constituting those offences. Proceeding against the applicant has been initiated on 21‑7‑1993 and the list of cases registered against him reveals that last case was registered in the year 1992 and previous, to this a case was registered‑against the applicant in 1990 which shows that he is not habitual offender. He further contends that the learned Magistrate issued non‑bailable warrant against the applicant instead of summons. Mr. Ashiq Raza, Advocate for the State does not oppose this application and concedes that there is no material before the learned Magistrate for taking cognizance and issuance of non‑bailable warrant against the applicant. I have gone through the record and heard arguments of the learned advocate for the applicant. It has been generally held that essential requirement for taking cognizance on police report against the applicant is that it must briefly state (i) the acts with which the person complained against is charged, (ii) the details of time and place of said acts, and (iii) general repute of a person complained or such other allegations made against him. In this case report by the police does not give detail and time or place of the alleged offences. Bad, reputation of applicant is not corroborated by the evidence of any public personnel. Mere fact that a person is suspected in some offence or offences or even that he was challaned in respect of certain offences would not be sufficient to bring his case within the purview of section 14 of the Act. Mere mention that the applicant had a bad reputation of being notorious and hazardous criminal without specifying the instances or being involved in any incident or breach of peace and the mere citation in the report of some cases without indicating the result was not sufficient to bring the case of the applicant within the purview of section 14 of the Crime Act. Section 5 of the Sindh Crimes Control Act lays down that on receipt of the report, the Tribunal shall issue a summons requiring the person complained against to appear. Of course proviso to that section empowers tribunal to issue warrant of the arrest but in that case tribunal has to record reasons. No reason for taking drastic step by issuing warrants, has been given by the Magistrate, which clearly indicate that he has not properly applied his mind while taking cognizance of the matter. Reliance has been placed in case of Haji Jan v. The State reported in 1994 P Cr. L J

1. I am of the view that the continuation of proceedings against the applicant are clearly abuse of the process of the Court. In view of the above discussion I quash the proceedings initiated against the appellant. These are the reasons of my short order already announced. N.H.Q./N‑548/K Proceedings quashed.