Notice of Respondent Ng. 2 has not been received back.
2. Through this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 4.05.2009 passed by a learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Khanewal/Ex-officio Justice of 'the Peace and has prayed for setting aside of the same, with the further prayer to direct Respondent No, 2 to register a criminal case.
3. As per contents of the writ petition duly supported by an affidavit, the petitioner moved an application to the SHO, P.S. Kacha Khu, District Khanewal for registration of the case but the SHO did not register the same and thereafter the petitioner approached the learned Addl. Sessions Judge/Ex-officio Justice of the Peace, Khanewal Respondent No, 1, under Sections 22-A, 22-B, Cr.P.C. and vide order dated 4.05.2009 the learned Ex-officio Justice of the Peace dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner 'with the observation that, "In view of report of SHO, the disputed Khal passed from the lands owned by the respondents. SHO also reportedthat the petitioner did not produce his. witnesses in support of his allegations. Report of Naib Tehsildar Khanewal is also attached with e file which reveals that the disputed Khal is situated in Khasra No, 21/25 which is owned by Muhammad Ramzan etc, respondents.
In view of the report of Naib Tehsildar Khanewal and also that of SHO, P.S. Kacha Khu, no further action is required in this petition. The same is hereby dismissed."
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the record.
5. A perusal of the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-officio Justice of the Peace reveals that while passing the impugned order he has not acted in accordance with law as it appears that, he entered into an inquiry before passing the impugned order. In view of the dictum laid down in the esteemed citation, Muhammad Bashir versus Station House Officer Okara Cantt and others, (PLD 2007 S.C. 539), the learned Ex-officio Justice of the Peace was required to confine himself to the contents of the petition filed before him by the petitioner to find out as to whether a cognizable offence is made out or not. SHO, Police Station Kacha Khu has reported that the petitioner failed to produce before him the witnesses in support of his allegation. It thus implies that the SHO without registration of the case entered into investigation/inquiry into the matter which is unwarranted by law and is in clear violation of the esteemed citation mentioned supra. In the circumstances, the impugned order of the learned Ex-officio Justice of the peace dated 4.5.2009 is set aside and Respondent No, 2 is directed to record the statement of the petitioner and if he finds that a cognizable offence has been committed he may register a case under Section 154 Cr.P.C. and proceed strictly in accordance with law. The petitioner is directed to approach the SHO, Police Station Kacha Khu for recording his statement. The instant order may also be conveyed to Respondent No, 1 through the learned Assistant Advocate-General. Respondent No, 2 shall send a report to Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan through its Deputy Registrar (Judi.) qua the action taken in this matter.
6. Petition is accepted.