PLJ 2022 Cr.C. (Note) 136
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--
----Ss. 204, 435 & 439--Petitioner filed private complaint--Dismissed--Revision petition--There is no cavil with proposition that no limitation is of provided for filing of criminal complaint but it is equally correct that delay in approaching Court would cast doubt on veracity of allegations leveled in same for reason longer a complaint is delayed less becomes chances for believing in its contents, more particularly when same is merely based on words of mouth of complainant--Unnecessary delay in filing of complaint may be a good ground for refusing to proceed with complaint for issuance of process for summoning of respondents--Filing of complaint by complainant was manifestly tainted with mala fide--Trial Court while taking stock of whole material available on record rightly declined to issue process by dismissing complaint--Bare perusal of provisions of Section 203 of Cr.P.C. would show that proper safeguard has been provided by legislature so that frivolous, baseless and vexatious complaints must be buried at their inception--Revision dismissed. [Para 4] A & B
2010 SCMR 105 & 2000 SCMR 1904.
Sayyed Zia Haider Zaidi, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. Ansar Yasin, Deputy Prosecutor General for State.
Mr. Qasim Ali Butt, Advocate for Respondents No. 2 & 3.
Date of hearing: 9.2.2022.
PLJ 2022 Cr.C. (Note) 136
[Lahore High Court, Multan Bench]
Present: Shakil Ahmad, J.
Mst. KHANSA TABASSUM--Appellant
versus
STATE and 2 others--Respondents
Crl. Rev. No. 201 of 2021, decided on 9.2.2022.
Order
This revision petition has been filed to assail order dated 31.07.2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khanewal, whereby private complaint filed by petitioner titled “Mst. Khansa Tabassum vs Muhammad Aamir & another” under Sections 302, 109, PPC was dismissed.
2. facts necessary for the decision of instant petition, precisely are that petitioner filed private complaint stating therein that on 17.09.2020 at about 09:00 A.M. she along with her sisters Tooba Tabassum, Hifsa Tabassum and brother Muhammad Arbaz-ul-Islam was present whereas her maternal uncle Muhammad Amir also came in her house on previous night and was quarrelling with her brother Muhammad Arbaz-ul-Islam by saying him not to visit his house at Multan and that conversation was heard by petitioner (complainant) along with her sisters while sitting in front of them. As per contents of private complaint, petitioner was refraining her maternal uncle when in the meanwhile Muhammad Aamir stood up and picked a Churri and tried to stab complainant’s brother Arbaz-ul-Islam who in order to stop Churri blow, put forward his left hand, however received Churri injury on his left arm resulting in cutting of vein of his left arm. According to contents of complaint, petitioner and her sisters snatched Churri from Muhammad Aamir whereafter Muhammad Aamir caught hold of Arbaz-ul-Islam and forcibly put him on bricks and taking a foot of cot (چارپائی کا پاوا) inflicted its several blows hitting on the backside of head, left leg, back and on different parts of body of Arbaz-ul-Islam and same was again snatched by complainant and her sisters, however, due to successive bleeding Arbaz-ul-Islam succumbed to the injuries at the spot and Muhammad Aamir managed his escape good. Motive was stated to be that Arbaz-ul-Islam had been visiting the house of Muhammad Aamir who had a suspicion of illicit liaison of his wife with Arbaz-ul-Islam and due to that suspicion he killed Arbaz-ul-Islam. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khanewal, having received complaint sent the same to learned Judicial Magistrate, Khanewal for holding) inquiry, who after recording statements of witnesses submitted his report and learned Additional Sessions Judge after going through the record dismissed the complaint vide order dated 31.07.2021, hence this petition.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Record perused.
4. There is no denial to the fact that an FIR No. 487 of 2020 dated 18.09.2020 under Sections 302, 109, 34, PPC was got lodged by one Abdul Manan at Police Station Saddar, Khanewal by raising specific allegations against Aamir, Tooba Tabassum and present petitioner Kliansa Tabassum and after usual investigation, report under Section 173, Cr.P.C. was submitted in the Court of competent jurisdiction. Petitioner who is one of the accused of aforesaid FIR, filed private complaint on 24.02.2021 with delay of five months without any plausible explanation. There is no cavil with the proposition that no limitation is of provided for filing of criminal complaint but it is equally correct that delay in approaching the Court would cast doubt on the veracity of allegations levelled in the same for the reason longer a complaint is delayed the less becomes the chances for believing in its contents, more particularly when same is merely based on words of mouth of the complainant. Unnecessary delay in filing of complaint may be a good ground for refusing to proceed with the complaint for issuance of process for summoning of respondents. Reliance in this regard may safely be placed on case law titled “Muhammad Fiaz Khan vs. Ajmer Khan” (2010 SCMR 105). It may further be shown that while issuing process under the provisions of Section 204 of Cr.P.C., Court must be fully conscious of the material available before it particularly where complainant party was facing the charge for the same crime in FIR case pending before the Court of competent jurisdiction. In the instant case, when contents of Paragraph No. 2 of the complaint are seen, the same on the face of it, appear to be sketchy and lacking coherence. It was highly improbable that a real brother was being subjected to torture by the accused and his real sisters despite snatching Churri from his hands would have allowed the accused to cause further multiple injuries by wooden foot of the cot and the same was also allegedly snatched by the petitioner and her sisters and still accused managed his escape good from the spot. The allegations made in the complaint, on the face of it, are so absurd and inherently improbable as no prudent person could reach to the conclusion that the same were sufficient for proceeding against the respondents. Sequence of events as described in Paragraph No. 3 when are taken at their face value, it depicts that occurrence might have taken place in the night when Muhammad Aamir was shown to be quarreling with Arbaz-ul-Islam but not in the way detailed in the complaint. Filing of complaint by the complainant was manifestly tainted with mala fide. Learned trial Court while taking stock of the whole material available on record rightly declined to issue the process by dismissing the complaint. Bare perusal of provisions of Section 203 of Cr.P.C. would show that proper safeguard has been provided by the legislature so that frivolous, baseless and vexatious complaints must be buried at their inception. Reliance in this regard may safely be placed on case law titled “Abdul Wahab Khan vs. Muhammad Nawaz” (2000 SCMR 1904).
5. The upshot of the above discussion is that no case of taking any exception to the impugned order at all is made out. Petition in hand is devoid of any force, the same is hereby dismissed.
(A.A.K.) Revision dismissed
0 Comments