' JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, J.---The petitioner's grievance is that the Police has closed the investigation of the case F.I.R. No,95 of 2010 dated 15-3-2010 lodged by him under section 302, P.P.C. Registered with Police Station Taranda Muhammad Panah, District Rahim Yar Khan. The High Court through the impugned judgment has observed that the petitioner has an alternate remedy by way of filing a private complaint. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the observation in the impugned judgment that the Court cannot interfere in the proceedings of investigation, is not legally well founded. In support of this contention he has cited case-law including cases titled Ghulam Sarwar Zardari v. Piyar Ali (201Q SCMR 624) and Muhammad Latif v. Sharifan Bibi (1998 SCM R 666). Case- law is dependent upon circumstances. We are not inclined to interfere in the order firstly passed by a learned Single Judge in Chambers in the High Court and affirmed by a learned Division Bench in ICA.
2. In appropriate cases it is true the Court may interfere and direct the reinvestigation of a case.
This petition, however, does not present sufficient justification for overriding the opinion of the three Judges of the High Court who have held that the lodging of a private complaint will constitute an adequate alternate remedy to the petitioner.
3. In the foregoing circumstances, we do not find any merit in this petition. The same is, therefore, dismissed and leave to appeal is declined.