' MUHAMMAD YAWAR ALI, J.---Through this petition filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the petitioner, Ghulam Rasul seeks setting aside of the impugned order dated 3-1-2013 passed by respondent No,1 while hearing the case as Ex-Officio Justice of Peace.
2. The petitioner filed a petition under sections 22-A and 22-B Cr.P.C. Before respondent No,1 dated 8-12-2012 stating therein that a criminal case was to be registered against respondents Nos.4 and 5 (herein) as they had committed a cognizable offence. Respondent No,1 after calling for a report from the concerned police official dated 17-12-2012 dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner on 3-1-2013 by holding as follows:-- "Bare perusal of contents of the petition reveals that petitioner by filing instant petition attempted to lodge a criminal case against the respondent by using this forum whereas he has also filed contempt petition for violating injunctive order. The petition is baseless, hence the same is dismissed."
3. A civil suit with regard to the property referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioner is pending adjudication between the parties. The petitioner has filed a contempt petition against respondents Nos.4 and 5 for violation of a stay order issued by the Civil Court. After hearing the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and going through the impugned order it is clear that the version of the petitioner has not been affirmed by the concerned police official in his report dated 17-12-2012. Respondent No,1 did not fall in error by holding that no direction for registration of a criminal case against respondents Nos.4 and 5 could be issued as the petitioner has already filed a contempt petition for violation of a stay order which would entail penal consequences before a civil court qua his grievance. It is trite that an Ex-Officio Justice of Peace while seized of a petition under section 22-A/22-B, Cr.P.C. Is not to act mechanically by issuing a direction for registration of a criminal case in each and every case, which had to be decided on its own peculiar facts as has been held by this court in Mian ABDUL WAHEED v.
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE LAHORE and 7 others 2011 PCr.LJ 438. In any case the allegations levelled against the accused persons by the petitioner cannot be gone into by this court while exercising its extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973, as the same would entail a factual inquiry. A landmark judgment delivered by the august Supreme Court of Pakistan Col. Shah Sadiq v. Muhammad Ashiq and others 2006 SCM R 276 may be read with considerable advantage.
4. The upshot of the above discussion is that this petition being without any merit is dismissed in limine.