1. ' SYED MAHMOOD ALAM RIZVI, J.---The applicants have impugned the order dated 8-3-2008 on application under section 22-A, Cr.P.C. Whereby the said application was allowed and the order of the C.C.P.O. Regarding reinvestigation in Crime No,89/2007 was restrained and the transferee Inspector as well, was directed to arrest the applicants and proceed according to law.
2. ' Precisely, the facts of the case are that as a result of family dispute, the respondent, No,2 lodged F.I.R. No,89 of 2007 under section 392/34, P.P.C. At PS Brigade, as per order of the learned IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi East.
3. ' That the respondent No,2 contended in the said F.I.R. That on 16-4-2007 at 4-00 p.m. When he was in his flat, consisting of two rooms one being used for living purpose and the other having been established for office, the applicants along with their mother-in-law came and abused the respondent and on gunpoint took away all the furniture and articles of the flat and went away. The worth of the articles was estimated about Rs,600,000. The respondent No,2 was, therefore, forced to go to Lahore to persuade his in-laws and the applicants, to return his articles as well as his wife and daughter, but they, instead extended death threats to him. As a result, he came back and filed a complaint with the concerned police station on 1-5-2007. However, no F.I.R. Could be registered as a result of which the respondent No,2 filed a complaint for registration of the F.I.R. Before the Sessions Judge on 17-5-2007 and subsequently, vide order dated 23-5-2007 the above F.I.R. Was registered on 25-5-2007.
4. ' That during the investigation the said respondent No,2 informed the police that all the accused persons including the applicants were residing in Lahore, therefore, on 17-7-2007 the challan had been submitted and all the accused persons were placed in column 2 under section 512, Cr.P.C. As absconders.
5. ' The case remained dormant. In the meanwhile, the applicants came to know about the said registration of F.I.R, and filed an application before the C.C.P.O. For re-investigation as they claimed that the case was false and fabricated and that they were involved in the same with mala fides, ulterior motives and due to a family dispute, which had been converted into a criminal case. As a result thereof and to ascertain the truth, the C.C.P.O., Karachi was pleased to order for a reinvestigation of the case vide his order dated 28-7-2007, as per law.
6. ' The applicants also applied for their bail before arrest and interim pre-arrest bail was granted to them on 17-3-2008, which was subsequently, confirmed on 5-5-2008.
7. ' That the respondent No,2 filed an application under section 22-A, Cr.P.C. Before the Justice of Peace to restrain the new Investigating Officer for reinvestigation of the case in the above crime as per order of C.C.P.O, but the learned Justice of Peace, without hearing or even notice to the applicants or the accused has passed the impugned order, which is before me.
8. ' Mr. Mehmood A. Qureshi, learned counsel for the applicants, inter alia, contended that the applicants filed the application under section 22-A, Cr.P.C. On 31-1-2008 and without hearing or notice to the applicants the impugned order had been passed, otherwise it could not have been passed in such manner, as earlier the respondent No,2 but filed application to restrain the re- investigation before the Sessions Judge, which application was transferred to IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi East, who was pleased to dismiss the same vide order dated 21-1-2008, wherein he held that the provision of reinvestigation was always available, but the respondent No,2 had concealed the above fact, which shows that he was habitual in filing false applications.
9. ' Mr. Qureshi, further contended that after going through the F.I.R. Every person of prudent mind could spell out that the case was apparently fabricated, as the respondent No,2 kept silent for two full weeks and even he was said to have alleged that the Mohallah people were the witnesses of the incident, but no name has transpired in the F.I.R, and keeping in view the family dispute, as already mentioned in the F.I.R, re-investigation was an essential element particularly, when the challan had already been submitted under section 512, Cr.P.C. Against the applicants and the actual facts were not placed before the Investigating Officer. As a result, it was essential to approach the high-ups of the police, therefore, as per law and rules, the re-investigation order was passed. If the case of the respondent No,2 is true then he should not be scared of the re- investigation as the Mohallah people were well present when the above incident was said to have occurred as claimed by him.
10. ' Mr. Qureshi contended that the impugned order was vague, illegal and misinterpretation of law, and that the judgments cited in the impugned order were not applicable in this case. He further contended that the Justice of Peace had no power to restrain the investigation.
11. ' Mr. Qureshi relied on the famous case of Shahnaz Begum v. Honourable Judges of the High Court of Sindh and Baluchistan PLD 1971 SC 677, Brigadier Imtiaz' s case 1994 SCMR 2124, Bhaitan v. State PLD 2005 Karachi 621 and Muhammad Yousuf v. State 2000 SCMR 453.
12. ' The ratio of the above judgment is clear that investigation cannot be stopped A by a Court or a Justice of Peace except for want of jurisdiction.
13. ' The case was fixed yesterday and matter was partly heard for one long hour and for further arguments it is adjourned for today at 9-30-a.m. But the real uncle of the respondent No,2 has informed this Court that Mr. Mahfooz Yar Khan, learned counsel for the respondent No,2 was not feeling well today and was, therefore, unable to appear before the Court. Yesterday this Court had given its opinion and had asked Mr. Mahfooz Yar Khan, as to under what authority the Justice of Peace had restrained the re-investigation or whether the re-investigation could be stopped by the Justice of Peace or the Court itself, particularly, in this case. Mr. Mahfooz Yar Khan had no answer and sought time for today, but unfortunately he is not feeling well.
14. ' The learned State counsel, frankly conceded and contended that under section 22-A, Cr.P.C. The Justice of Peace has no power to restrain the reinvestigation.
15. ' Heard both the lawyers and have gone through the record and the judgment cited by both the sides.
16. ' Admittedly, in this particular case the Justice of Peace had exceeded her jurisdiction by misinterpreting section 22-A(6), Cr.P.C. And further, that she had relied upon the judgment reported in Muhammad Riaz v. Muhammad Ansar 2006 MLD 1357, which is on absolutely different facts and circumstances and was not applicable in this case. The aforementioned judgments cited by Mr. Qureshi are very clear, specific and all the Courts were dispensing justice under guidelines given by the Honourable Supreme Court particularly, in the famous case of Shahnaz Begum (supra). The Court does not want to discuss the merits of the case as it would hamper the investigation or could prejudice either party. Suffice it to say that the impugned order is vague, illegal and is liable to be set aside. As a result, the application is allowed. The Investigating Officer appointed by the high- ups for reinvestigation should conclude, the investigation within 15 days of the receipt of this order and submit the supplementary challan before the trial Court. Till then proceedings of the trial Court are hereby stayed.