1. ' SYED MAHMOOD ALAM RIZVI, J.--- The instant application is directed against the impugned order, dated 21-11-2007, passed by the learned IInd Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, Karachi (Central), whereby private complaint of the applicant was dismissed as the same was not registered after examination of the complainant and her two witnesses. The same was impugned before the learned Sessions Judge. Subsequently, was transferred before the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi (Central) bearing Criminal Revision Application No,33 of 2007 but the same was also dismissed, vide order, dated 4-1-2008.
2. ' Precisely, the facts of the case are that, father and brother of the husband of the applicant were died and thereafter, disputes were raised between the husband of the applicant with her sister and proceedings were pending before the Area Nazim, as a result, allegedly the respondents entered into the house of the applicant, used filthy language and extended serious threats of life to her and her husband in presence of witnesses, who were the friends of the husband of the applicant, present in the house of the applicant and on the same day i.e. 29th March, 2007, the applicant had moved an application before the S.H.O., Police Station Bilal Colony, but no action was taken against the respondent, as a result she filed a private complaint.
3. The learned Judicial Magistrate recorded her statement as well as the statements of two other witnesses, who prima facie supported the A version of the complainant/applicant and thereafter, sent file to the concerned S.H.O. For preliminary inquiry, who also filed a report that no statement was recorded, as a result, the learned Judicial Magistrate dismissed private complaint by holding that it is a family dispute and besides when direct complaint was sent to S.H.O. For inquiry, the complainant party not appeared before him, hence inquiry was not conducted. Therefore, the complainant has failed to establish his case beyond any shadow of doubt.
4. ' The learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the order of the Judicial Magistrate regarding inquiry in the aforementioned case was received by A.S.-I. Aijaz Khokhar of Police Station Bilal Colony on 8th March, 2007, in the late hours of the night, so he sent notices to concerned parties for their appearance on the next day regarding recording of their statements but none has appeared, hence he filed an application to the concerned Court on 9-5-2007 and sought time for conducting inquiry, as a very short time was allowed to him and he further requested that he wanted to record the statements of both the parties and their witnesses.
5. The learned Judicial Magistrate neither granted nor allowed the said application but only mention "file it", dated 10-5-2007". Hence the said inquiry was not conducted for want of time and the earlier order of the learned Judicial Magistrate was not complied with but in haste the learned Judicial Magistrate dismissed the complaint by giving an impression that the complainant was not prepared to appear before the S.H.O. And the learned Appellate Court also overlooked this fact.
6. ' The learned State Counsel on behalf of the Advocate-General has supported the arguments of the learned counsel for the applicant and contended that earlier the learned Judicial Magistrate had passed an order to conduct preliminary inquiry, but the same was not done, as only two days was given to the concerned S.H.O. And as per application for extension of time by the Inquiry Officer, the notices for appearance were not served upon the parties hence, he is not supporting the impugned orders.
7. ' Heard both the learned counsel and perused the record.
8. It is, rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the applicant that the Inquiry Officer sought extension of time but the learned Judicial Magistrate presumed otherwise and Mr. Abdul Majeed learned State Counsel rightly conceded that inquiry should have been conducted first.
9. ' In the above circumstances, this application is allowed both the orders, referred above, are set aside. The learned Sessions Judge Central is directed to call R&P of private complaint bearing No, Nil of 2007 (Mst. Aisha Khatoon v. Mst. Razia Khatoon and others) and transfer the same to some other Judicial Magistrate.
10. ' In the above terms this application is allowed.