199----Ss. 22-A & 22-B-- -مجرمانہ مقدمہ درج کرنے کی درخواست-مقامی پولیس کو ہدایت-سول قانونی چارہ جوئی کا رجحان-پولیس کی رپورٹ-قتل کے خطرات-واقعے کے پیچھے..............

 PLJ 2023 Lahore (Note) 12

Present: Shahid Waheed, J.

ABDUL REHMAN KHAN--Petitioner

versus

ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE/EX-OFFICIO JUSTICE OF PEACE and 4 others--Respondents

W. P. No. 229788 of 2018, decided on 29.6.2022.

Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--

----Ss. 22-A & 22-B--

- آئین پاکستان ، 1973 ، آرٹ ۔ 199-مجرمانہ مقدمہ درج کرنے کی درخواست-مقامی پولیس کو ہدایت-سول قانونی چارہ جوئی کا رجحان-پولیس کی رپورٹ-قتل کے خطرات-واقعے کے پیچھے محرک-واقعے کے پیچھے محرک کو سول قانونی چارہ جوئی قرار دیا گیا ہے-مقامی پولیس کی طرف سے ایکس آفس جسٹس آف پیس کے سامنے پیش کردہ رپورٹ سے پتہ چلتا ہے کہ واقعہ پیش آیا تھا ۔ 3 پایا جاتا ہے کہ جھوٹے مقامی پولیس سیکشن 182 ، P.P.C.--Petition کے تحت اس کے خلاف کارروائی کرنے کے لئے آزاد ہو جائے گا.      

----Ss. 22-A & 22-B--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 199--Petition for registration of criminal case--Direction to local police--Pendency of civil litigation--Police report--Threats of killing--Motive behind occurrence--Motive behind occurrence has been mentioned to be civil litigation--Report submitted by local police before Ex-officio Justice of Peace shows that occurrence had taken place--Ex-officio Justice of Peace in impugned order has also observed that if information provided by Respondent No. 3 is found false local police would be at liberty to proceed against him under Section 182, P.P.C.--Petition dismissed.                           [Para 4] A

Mr. M. Mushtaq Ahmed Dhoon, Advocate for Petitioner.

Mr. Muhammad Arif Raja, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for Respondents.

Date of hearing: 29.6.2022.

Order

The petitioner through this constitutional petition has challenged the vires of order dated 11th August, 2018 passed by the Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, Piplan, District Mianwali whereby application filed by Respondent No. 3 under Sections 22-A/22-B, Cr.P.C. for registration of a criminal case against the present petitioner and another was disposed of with the direction to the local police to record the version of Respondent No. 3 under Section 154, Cr.P.C. and strictly proceed in accordance with the law. It was also observed that if information provided by Respondent No. 3 was found false the local police would be at liberty to proceed against him under Section 182, PPC.

2. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the petitioner and Respondent No. 3 are real brothers and civil litigation is already pending between them, and that the allegations levelled by Respondent No. 3 in the application under Sections 22-A/22-B, Cr.P.C. are false and frivolous. It is further submitted that there are contradictions in the application under Sections 22-A/22-B, Cr.P.C. and the police report, as the former depicts that the wall was demolished whereas the latter shows that only an attempt was made. Moreover, the police report indicates that threats of killing were extended to Respondent No. 3 and his son whereas no such allegation has been levelled in the application and thus, the impugned order being unjustified is liable to be set aside.

3. Learned Additional Advocate General while controverting the arguments advanced by the petitioner’s counsel submits that there is no illegality or irregularity in the impugned order, as the occurrence mentioned in the application filed by Respondent No. 3 did disclose commission of a cognizable offence.

4. It has been alleged in the application under Sections 22-A/22-B, Cr.P.C. filed by Respondent No. 3 that the petitioner along with another forcibly entered his house, gave him and his son beating with Dandas and Sotas and damaged the wall and other house hold articles. The motive behind the occurrence has been mentioned to be the civil litigation. The report submitted by the local police before the Ex-officio Justice of Peace shows that the occurrence had taken place. The Ex-officio Justice of Peace in the impugned order has also observed that if the information provided by Respondent No. 3 is found false the local police would be at liberty to proceed against him under Section 182, P.P.C. In these attending circumstances, I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order made by the Ex-officio Justice of Peace. This petition being devoid of any merits is accordingly dismissed.

(Y.A.)  Petition dismissed