SHAHNAWAZ TARIQ, J.-Through captioned criminal misc. Application, applicant Manzoor Hussain has impugned order dated 10.02.2014, passed by the Court of II Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, Khairpur, whereby summary report submitted by Investigating Officer under 'IV Class, was accepted in 'C' Class.
2. Relevant facts narrated in instant misc. Application are that applicant Manzoor Hussain lodged FIR No,17 of 2015, under section 324, P.P.C. At Police Station, 'A Section, Khairpur, stating that he is an Advocate of High Court. On 18.01.2014, after attending the proceedings of Misc. Application filed by him, in the Court of III Additional Sessions Judge, Khairpur, for lodgment of FIR against accused Ghulam Mustafa alias Mustoo, Qamaruddin and Mohammad Ali, when he, came out of the Court, above named accused put their hands over their beard gave him warning and issued criminal intimidation. On same day, at about 3:30 p.m., when complainant along with his brother Ghulam Murtaza left the Court premises for their house and reached at the main gate of the Sessions Court building, accused Moula Bux Maitlo, Ghulam Mustafa and Qamaruddin armed with pistols made straight fires upon him with intention to commit his murder but same were missed. He suspected that Bashir Shahwani, Mohammad Amir and Mohammad Ali are spying and are in collusion with them in commission of offence for attempting to commit murder because they were hiding themselves at the place of wardat. The delay in lodging of FIR was due to the fact that he was engaged in the proceedings of the cases in different Courts, hence instant FIR.
3. Applicant contended that Investigating Officer has not conducted impartial investigation of the crime and after recording statements of independent witnesses, submitted final report; that it was mandatory for learned Magistrate to take cognizance and direct the Investigating Officer to submit Challan as he is regular practicing advocate; that Investigating Officer could not consider the statements of independent witnesses while submitting final report and same may be placed before the Court during trial; that learned Magistrate has not assigned any cogent and sound reasons in the impugned order.
4. While controverting the above submissions, proposed accused Ghulam Mustafa vehemently contended that he is a retired CM0 of the Sessions Court and elder brother of applicant who is disputed with him over the landed property and their dispute was also settled by a Senior Counsel Mr. Liaqat Ali Shar, learned AAG Sindh and despite such settlement of dispute, applicant has lodged instant false FIR by taking the undue advantage of his status being a practicing Advocate in Court; that learned Magistrate has passed a proper order and instant application is liable to be dismissed.
5. Learned APG supported the impugned order and submitted that the contents of FIR are self- contradictory and applicant has not cited any independent witness from the vicinity in support of allegations leveled in FIR.
6. Heard parties in person and learned APG and examined the material available on record minutely.
7. Perusal of available material emanates that applicant and main proposed accused are real brothers and disputed over landed property. Indeed, alleged incident occurred on 18.01.2014, at 3:30 p.m. Near the outer gate of Sessions Court building and at the relevant time the availability of general public, litigants and other Advocates could not be ruled out. It is significant to mention that PW Ghulam Murtaza is real brother of applicant and respondent No,1, but he is in league with the applicant, and is an interested witness and his statement could not be believed in the absence of corroboration of any independent iota of evidence. It could not persuade to the prudent mind that except PW Ghulam Murtaza none else witnessed the incident though the place of incident is situated on a main busy road of Khairpur City and surrounded by the Courts, shops, Hotels, offices of Advocates and is residential as well as commercial area, but allegations of applicant were not supported by any independent witness of the vicinity. Applicant did not approach the concerned Police Station instantaneously for the lodgment of FIR and he remained busy in Court proceedings of the different cases for two days, such demeanor of applicant has not only created serious doubt regarding the commission of the alleged incident but invalidated the factum of occurrence.
Moreover, during the inspection of place of wardat no empty was secured by the Investigating Officer from the spot which is also fatal to the allegations levelled by applicant. It is obligatory for the Magistrate to examine the averments of FIR statements under section 161 Cr.P.C. Recorded during investigation and final summery report submitted by the Investigating Officer judiciously and after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to complainant, should pass an appropriate order supported with sound reasons by exercising power envisaged under section 173, Cr.P.C. And procedure provided in Rule 47.7, Vol. III Police Rules, 1934.
8. Perusal of the impugned order reflects that learned Magistrate has afforded right of audience to the applicant and after considering the entire circumstances and available material on the record, has passed a just and proper order, which does not suffer from any gross illegality or material irregularity and does not call for any interference, hence same stands maintained.
9. Considering the above facts and circumstances, instant miscellaneous application stands dismissed being devoid of any legal substance.