2002 P Cr (PLP)

Ss. 182 & 211

False statement

Complainant in his F.I.R. had very clearly stated that he had seen accused armed with guns

Complainant in his affidavit filed in Court had stated that in fact the accused were not the culprits of the case and he had only suspected them

Glaring Go bye to a previous version as given by the complainant could not be allowed to go unnoticed and in that case provisions of Ss.182 & 211, P.P.C. would become redundant

Show-cause notice was ordered to be issued to complainant as to why a case under S.182/211, P.P.C. be not registered against him. The trend of resiling from statements through affidavits by the prosecution witnesses is being witnessed since some time past. They do not hesitate in making changed statements even before Courts of law. If a glaring go bye to a previous version, is allowed to go unnoticed, the provisions of sections 182 and 211, P.P.C. shall remain redundant. Obviously, the police are unable to take cognizance of these misstatements or false statements. The stress to speak the truth always, is far more high in our religion. Qur'anic Verse 135 of Surat 4 (Alnisa) needs no elucidation. The complainant, therefore, needs to be questioned. A show-cause notice as to why a case under sections 182/211, P.P.C. be not registered against him be issued to the complainant. 1991 SCMR 111 and 1988 SCMR 474 ref. Ahmed Bux Ansari for Applicants. Muhammad Ismail Bhutto for the State. The applicants Jial and Liaquat Ali after rejection of their prayer for pre-arrest bail by the learned Sessions Court, Jacobabad, havd approached this Court for the same relief. The complainant Ghulam Mustafa in his F.I.R. lodged on 21-5-2001 has alleged that Ranjhan (absconding accused) his son-in-law, accused Daim brother of Ranjhan and two accused (present applicants) all armed with guns were seen by him to his house Out of them it is alleged that Ranjhan fired at his wife, Hakimzadi, the complainant's daughter who died on the spot due to receipt of gun shot. The bail of the applicants is pressed on the grounds that the complainant and two eve-witnesses Khuda Bux and Muhib have filed their affidavits wherein they have exonerated both the applicants. The learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance upon 1991 SCMR 111 and 1988 SCMR

474. Mr. Muhammad Ismail Bhutto, learned counsel appearing for the State has conceded to the grant of bail to the applicants. What can really be deduced from the above is that neither the complainant nor the two eye-witnesses are prepared to support the prosecution case. There are only three above named eye-witnesses, as far involvement of the two applicants is concerned. The authorities referred above support the contentions of the applicants counsel. The case against the applicants would fall within ambit of further inquiry. Interim pre arrest bail granted to both the applicants on 10-8-2001 is, therefore, confirmed in the same terms and conditions. The complainant in his F.I.R. has very clearly stated that he had seen applicants Jial and Liaquat in side his house at midnight time and both of them were armed with guns. In his affidavit filed in Court, he has however, stated that in fact the applicants are not the real culprits of this case and he had only suspected them. The trend of resiling from statements through affidavits by the prosecution witnesses is being witnessed since some time past. They do not hesitate in making such changed statements even before Courts of law. If a glaring go bye to a previous version, as given by the complainant in this case is allowed to go unnoticed, the provisions of sections 182 and 211, P.P.C. shall remain redundant. Obviously, the police are unable to take cognizance of these misstatements or false statements. The stress to speak the truth always, is far more high in our religion. Qur'anic Verse 135 of Surat 4 (Alnisa) needs no, elucidation. The complainant, therefore, needs to be questioned. A show-cause notice as to why a case under sections 182/211, P.P.C. be not registered against him be issued to the complainant. The complainant is directed to come with his reply to the show-cause notice on 31-8-2001. H.B.T./J-37/KOrder accordingly.