QALANDAR ALI KHAN, J.---This writ petition by the petitioners, all police officers, calls in question the judgment/order of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II/Justice of Peace, Swabi, dated 10-2- 2012, whereby, the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Justice of Peace directed the District Police Officer "to get the case registered against the SHO Izhar Shah and others of Police Station Kalu Khan as mentioned in the complaint of complainant, who were involved in the offence, under the relevant sections of law".
2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that the local police of Kalu Khan had registered a case under section 5 Explosive Substances Act read with section 7 ATA vide FIR No. Dated 4-1-2010, after the, alleged, recovery of huge quantity of safety fuse and dynamites from driver of vehicle bearing registration No.3572/LES, namely, Allah Ditta son of Khan Muhammad resident of District Sargodha and Zaheer Ahmed son of Sher Ahmed resident of Sultanpur, Haripur etc.
3. The record would show that the complainant/respondent No.3, while claiming to be a lawful license holder of explosives and running business according to law, complained to Human Rights Cell, Peshawar High Court, Peshawar, about the arrest of his attorney holders/agents namely Tariq Shah and Abdullah Shah by police party headed by SHO Police Station Kalu Khan after so-called recovery of the explosives from the vehicle whereby the same was being transported to his place of business. The complainant/respondent No.3 further complained that despite orders by competent Court to release the vehicle and case property, including explosives, the same, on return, were found to be deficient, which were, allegedly, mis-appropriated by the local police. The complaint was forwarded to the District and Sessions Judge, Swabi, for necessary action under section 22-A, Cr.P.C., and the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II/Justice of Peace, after receiving written reply, directed the registration of the case as mentioned above vide order dated 10-2-2012.
This writ petition is directed against the said order on the grounds that complainant/respondent No.3 was not an accused in the case registered against Allah Ditta etc, therefore, he had no locus standi to file complaint against the petitioners and further that complainant/ respondent No.3 was himself a proclaimed offender in case FIR No.459 dated 19-4-2009 under section 302/34, P.P.C.
Police Station Kalu Khan. The petitioners, however, admitted that "due to some misunderstanding the complete case property could not be returned", and that the case property was still lying in the police "Malkhana" of Police Station Kalu Khan and further that if complainant/respondent No.3 had any grievance, he should have filed civil suit for damages' against the petitioners.
4. Be that as it may, the fact remains that inspite of clear order dated 10-2-2012 for registration of case, the order of the Court of competent jurisdiction has not been complied with so far. As such, there has been a flagrant violation of the expressed provision of law under sections 154, Cr.P.C. And 22-A(6) Cr.P.C., reiterated time and again by the Courts of competent jurisdiction in the country in judgments reported as PLD 2003 Lahore 228, 2004 PCr.LJ 1214 (Lahore), PLD 2005 Karachi 621, 2007 PCr.LJ 1939 (Lahore), PLD 2007 SC 539, PLD 2008 Peshawar 53 and 2010 PCr.LJ 45 Peshawar.
5. The allegations that complainant/respondent No.3 was himself a proclaimed offender and that he was not an accused in the case so as to complain about the misappropriation of the recovered explosives from the possession of accused in the case are immaterial and would not lend any support to the case of the petitioners against the order under section 22-A(6) Cr.P.C. Of the Court of competent jurisdiction, because simple registration of case would not mean holding them guilty for the offences with which they will be charged in the FIR, as registration of FIR will certainly be followed by investigation and trial, wherein, they c can not only prove their innocence but can also set process of law in motion against the complainant/respondent No.3 for lodging a false .report.
6. In view of the above stated safeguards, and remedies available to the petitioners, they had no locus standi to file this writ petition and thereby hinder process of law unnecessarily. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed, with direction to the :PPO/IGP, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, to look into the conduct of the concerned SHO and take action deemed appropriate by him under intimation to the Registrar of this Court.