Through this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the legality of order dated 12.01.2015 passed by learned Ex-Officio Justice of Peace (Addl. Sessions Judge) Multan, whereby the application made by the petitioner under Section 22-A & 22-B Cr.P.C. Seeking direction for registration of a case against respondent No.3 was dismissed.
2. The petitioner made an application under Section 22-A & 22-B Cr.P.C. Seeking direction for the registration of case against respondent No.3 before Ex-officio Justice of Peace stating therein that on 05.08.2013 he received a cheque of Rs.14,00,000/- from respondent No.3 as his share inherited by his father Maqbool Ahmad, who died on 20.09.2012 and respondent No.3 prepared a fake stamp paper on behalf of his dead father and making efforts to dispossess the petitioner illegally from a shop inherited to him by his father. In this regard, proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. Are also pending in the Court of Special Judicial Magistrate. The petitioner has also filed an application under Section 476 Cr.P.C. Before the competent Court of law, which was dismissed. The learned Ex- Officio Justice of Peace after procuring the report from the police, dismissed the application of the petitioner on the ground that civil litigation is pending between the parties and petitioner submitted the said petition as counterblast to convert a civil dispute into a criminal case. The petitioner being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, filed the instant writ petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that cognizable offence was made out but even then learned Ex-officio Justice of Peace dismissed the application of the petitioner arbitrarily.
4. On the other hand, learned law officer has contended that civil as well as criminal litigation is pending between the parties and petitioner wants to convert a civil dispute into a criminal one. The other efficacious remedy is available to the petitioner.
5. Arguments heard and record perused.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not point out any legal and factual infirmity in the impugned order and also could not controvert what has been stated in the police report and parawise comments furnished by the police. There is nothing on record that the learned Ex-officio Justice of Peace has improperly exercised discretion vested in him and impugned order has not shut the door of the petitioner to initiate the criminal proceedings by lodging private complaint.
The filing of private complaint can provide an equal adequate remedy to the petitioner and he can lead the entire evidence himself before the trial Court and his grievance can adequately be redressed. The proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. Are also pending adjudication between the parties before learned Special Judicial Magistrate.
7. Under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, it is not obligatory for the High Court to issue writ in each case especially when the adequate remedy in the form of private complaint being available to the petitioner. Reliance can be placed in case "Habib-ullah.
Vs. Political Assistant, Dera Ghazi Khan & others" (2005 S.C.M.R. 951), "Rai Ashraf and others. Vs. Muhammad Saleem Bhatti" (PLD 2010 S.C. 691), and "Muhammad Waris. Vs. SHO and another" (2014 M.L.D. 1033) in this behalf.
8. I have seen no illegality and infirmity in the impugned order dated 12.01.2015 passed by learned Ex-officio Justice of Peace and same is hereby maintained. Consequently, this writ petition being devoid of any merits is hereby dismissed.