MUHAMMAD TARIQ ABBASI, J.---Through the instant writ petition, the order dated 12-11-2012, passed by learned Justice of Peace (respondent No,1) has been challenged, whereby, the earlier order dated 31-10-2012 has been recalled.
2. The facts are that upon an application, moved by the present petitioner, under sections 22-A and 22-B, Cr.P.C., before the learned Justice of Peace, on 31-10-2012, a direction to the S.H.O. Concerned was issued to record version of the petitioner and if commission of a cognizable offence was made out, to register a criminal case. There after, Mapal Khan (respondent No,5) moved another application, before the learned Justice of Peace, for suspension and withdrawal of the above mentioned earlier order and consequently the learned Justice of Peace through order dated 12-11- 2012 had recalled the above said earlier order. Hence the instant writ petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the learned Justice of Peace was not at all competent to recall the order dated 31-10-2012 being passed in due course of law and as such the impugned order dated 12-11-2012 being a patent illegality, is not sustainable.
4. The learned Law Officer has opposed the writ petition.
5. The arguments have been heard and record has been perused.
6. It has been observed that the above mentioned earlier order dated 31-10-2012 was not baseless but conditional that if commission of a cognizable offence was found to be made out then a criminal case should be registered. It has been found that the said order has been withdrawn through the order dated 12-11-2012, with the contention that commission of any cognizable offence was not made out.
7. I am afraid, the above said reason was not sufficient for withdrawal of the earlier order because towards its implementation, the Investigating Officer was obliged to see whether commission of a cognizable offence was made out or not.
8. Even otherwise, once an order permissible under the law has been passed by the learned Justice of Peace, then without any reason, cause or justification, its review or withdrawal is not permissible.
Reference may be made, to case titled Aurangzeb Khan v. District Police Officer and 4 others' (2009 YLR 83). The relevant paragraph of the judgment speaks as under:-- "It is strange that despite categorical assertion of the applicant that the said S.H.O. Was favoring the opposite party, the Court of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge Hyderabad, instead of enforcing his earlier order dated 11-12-2004 accepted/entertained the application of S.H.O. Of Police Station Makki Shah dated 22-12-2004 and passed the impugned order dated 1-2-2005 reviewing his earlier order and directing the applicant for filing of direct complaint. Passing of such order by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge Hyderabad, seems to be patent illegality which is liable to be corrected in exercise of revisional powers of this Court. Accordingly, this criminal revision application is allowed and disposed of in the terms that the applicant shall appear before the S.H.O. Police Station Makki Shah for recording of his statement, whereafter further action shall follow strictly in accordance with law."
9. Due to the reasons mentioned above, the order dated 12-11-2012 of the learned Justice of Peace, whereby the earlier order passed on 31-10-2012 has been recalled/reviewed, could not be termed to be justified, hence is not acceptable in the eye of law.
10. Furthermore, commission of a non--cognizable offence, as stated by the learned Justice of Peace in the impugned order, is no ground, not to carry on any proceeding. Even for commission of non-cognizable offence, the due proceedings have been prescribed under section 155 of Cr.P.C.
11. Resultantly, the instant writ petition is allowed and order dated 12-11-2012 passed by learned Justice of Peace, whereby earlier order dated 31-10-2012 has been recalled, is set aside. However, it is made clear that the S.H.O. Concerned shall strictly follow the earlier order dated 31-10-2012 and shall carry on the proceedings within the four corners of law and procedure i.e, under sections 154, 155 or 157 of Cr.P.0 and if required, under section 182 of P.P.C.