' RIAZAT ALI SAHAR, J.---By medium of instant Criminal Miscellaneous Application, applicant has challenged the validity of order dated 19-11-2013, passed by learned 2nd Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, Sukkur, whereby he did not concur with the findings of Investigating Officer discharging the applicant and directed for his joining in the trial as also issued NBWs against him.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 26-10-2013 at 2215 hours, HC Abdul Jabbar Mahar of Police Station Abad lodged F.I.R. On behalf of State alleging therein that on 23-10-2013, while he was on patrol duty, he heard firing and rushed there and found a person to have died on the spot and another person in injured condition. He enquired from injured (son of deceased), who disclosed his name as Sajjad Shah and stated that accused Dur Muhammad alias Honey Jatoi (applicant), Shahid Dahar and Agha Nadeem Khan Pathan along with three unidentified persons, armed with deadly weapons, murdered his father, namely, Nazeer Shah and injured him.
Consequently, above F.I.R. Was lodged.
3. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has nothing to do with the alleged offence. He further submits that the independent evidence was brought on record during investigation in support of innocence of applicant but the same was not properly considered by learned Magistrate. He further contended that during course of the investigation, Investigating Officer collected entry No, 67 made at Police Station Gizri Karachi for an accident met with the applicant and also medical treatment report of applicant, issued by Jinnah Hospital, Karachi but this was not considered by learned Magistrate. He further submits that on the basis of cogent material, the Investigating Officer had rightly let off the applicant.
4. Conversely, the learned DDPP for the State opposed the grant of application and submitted that the applicant along with co-accused committed murder of deceased Nazeer Shah and injured his son Sajjad Shah and such version of the complainant in the F.I.R. Was fully corroborated by the prosecution witnesses during course of the investigation, but Investigating Officer with mala fide intentions and ulterior motives considered the managed plea of 'Alibi' during course of investigation and let off the applicant by ignoring the well settled principle of law.
5. I have considered the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant, learned DDPP for the State and examined the record meticulously.
6. A perusal of record reflects that F.I.R. Was lodged on behalf of State after the injured Sajjad Shah and his relatives refused to lodge the F.I.R.; therefore, plausible explanation for the delay seems to be there. In the F.I.R., the applicant along with co-accused has been assigned the role of committing murder of deceased Nazir Shah and causing injuries to his son, namely, Sajjad Shah.
The F.I.R. Is seconded by the statements of P.Ws. Under section 161, Cr.P.C. Insofar as the question of plea of 'Alibi'is concerned, it requires deeper appreciation which would be determined by the trial court during course of the trial.
7. It is pertinent to mention here that the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in similar circumstances, refused to grant leave while passing order dated 24-10-2013 in Cr1. P.L.A.No, 92-K of 2013, whereby the order dated 3-9-2013, passed by this court in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No, S-105 of 2013, was upheld. The relevant portion of order of Hon'ble Supreme Court is reproduced as under:- "We have heard the arguments of learned ASC for the petitioner and perused the case record. The learned ASC has not been able to show us any illegality in the impugned order, whereby directions have been issued to the trial court to join the petitioner Hafiz Muhammad Ahmed in the pending trial before the court of Judicial Magistrate Ghotki in the criminal case arising out of the above crime. No exception can be taken to such findings of the High Court. This being the position, leave to appeal is refused and this petition is dismissed".
8. In view of above, the instant Criminal Misc. Application stands dismissed.