2008 SCMR 853 (PLP)

IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J.

This petition arises out of order, dated 17th May, 2004 passed by learned High Court of Sindh, Hyderabad Circuit, whereby Criminal Revision Application No.11 of 2004 filed by the petitioner has been dismissed.

2. Petitioner instituted private complaint against the respondents on 12-1-2004 for initiating proceedings in accordance with law on account of allegedly committing offence under sections 324, 147, 149 and 109, P.P.C. which was dismissed on 12-1-2005. It is to be noted that prior to filing of the complaint F.I.R. No.52 of 2003 was lodged in respect of the same incident on 29-11-2003 but statedly no action was taken and after arrest of the accused they were released. Thus, it persuaded to file a private complaint against them.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that sufficient incriminating evidence was produced prima facie to involve the respondents in the commission of offence but the evidence against the respondents was discarded by the trial Court. Similarly the learned High Court at preliminary stage of the case had examined in depth the evidence of the complainant and concluded on the basis thereof that no case is made out against the respondents contrary to the settled principle of law that if incriminating evidence sufficient to put the accused to trial is available then deep appreciation of evidence is not warranted.

4. Learned Additional Advocate-General, Sindh also felt difficulty in supporting the impugned order. However, he stated that there is no incriminating evidence for recording conviction against the respondents, therefore, the complaint of the petitioner was rightly dismissed by the trial Court.

5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the impugned order as well as order passed by the trial Court and other material so made available on record. In our considered opinion it is not a case of the category in which the complaint should have been dismissed outrightly for want of incriminating evidence particularly in view of the statement of the complainant under section 200, Cr. P. C. and the medical evidence available on record and the trial Court may have been given opportunity to proceed with the matter and then to decide the fate of the case. Therefore, without going into merits of the case in depth it is appropriate to remand the case to the trial Court for proceeding with the complaint expeditiously and dispose of the matter as far as possible within a period of three months.

6. In view of the above discussion, petition is converted into appeal and allowed. The impugned order of the High Court is set aside the case is remanded to the Additional Sessions Judge, Nawabshah with the direction to dispose of the matter keeping in view the observations made hereinabove. N.H.Q./M-317/SC Case remanded.