SYED SHAHBAZ ALI RIZVI, J.---Learned counsel for the parties are ready to advance arguments on the merits of the case today, therefore, this case shall be treated as a `pacca' case.
2. Through this constitutional petition, the petitioner impugns the order dated 07.09.2016 passed by learned ex-officio Justice of Peace, Chiniot/respondent No,1, in connection with application moved by the petitioner under sections 22-A and 22-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, for registration of a criminal case against respondents Nos.4 to 9 in the following terms:- "6. Admittedly there is a dispute of possession of plot between the parties. Admittedly a civil suit is instituted by the respondents in which interim injunction was also granted. Admittedly FIR for illegal interference over the plot against the petitioner is lodged by the respondents party. Admittedly the medico legal certificate is being challenged by the complainant party. The affidavit of the witnesses of the occurrence denying his presence is also on file. There is a series of criminal cases against the petitioner and his brothers. Moreover police also supported the version of the respondents. In view of these all attending circumstances I am not inclined to issue a direction for the registration of FIR however the petitioner could avail remedy to file a private complaint if advised. Relied on case law PLD 2016 Supreme Court 581."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that from the allegations leveled by the petitioner against private respondents cognizable offence is made out as is the injury sustained by the injured Ghulam Qalandar has been declared Shajjah-i-Mudihah punishable under section 337- A(ii) of Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, cognizable and non-bailable in nature for which respondent No,3 was duty bound to register a criminal case against the private respondents; that having failed in getting registered a criminal case even through high-ups of respondent No,2 petitioner filed an application under sections 22-A and 22-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 before learned ex-officio Justice of Peace who dismissed the same vide impugned order dated 07.09.2016 without taking into consideration the above mentioned aspects of the matter, being so, the same is not sustainable in the eye of law.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents Nos.4 to 9 vehemently opposes the contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and contends that the petitioner is a criminal record holder and in fact there is a dispute of land between the parties and petitioner is trying to convert the civil proceedings into criminal just to blackmail and pressurize the respondents and that the learned ex-officio Justice of Peace has dismissed the application of petitioner moved under sections 22-A and 22-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 quite in accordance with law.
4. Arguments heard. Record available with the file perused.
5. The contents of paragraph No,2 of the application moved by the present petitioner under sections 22-A and 22-B of the- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, to the learned ex-officio Justice of Peace, find corroboration from the injury statement of injured Ghulam Qalandar prepared by Zafar Iqbal Head Constable/Moharrar Police Post dated 23.07.2016 and medico legal examination certificate dated 23.07.2016 reflecting the availability of a bone exposed injury on left side of head of injured Ghulam Qalandar besides other three injuries, that reveals commission of a cognizable offence. The application dated 23.07.2016 moved by the petitioner to the Station House Officer and the application moved to the District Police Officer, Chiniot, transpires that prior to approaching the learned ex-officio Justice of Peace he attempted to get his grievance redressed by the concerned police authorities. There is no doubt about the proposition that on receiving information regarding commission of an offence, respondent No,3 is under legal obligation to proceed either under section 154 or 155 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 according to the narration and facts of the information furnished to him. Registration of criminal cases against the petitioner and his relatives do not disqualify him to get registered a criminal case otherwise required to 'be registered under the law. The arguments mainly furnished by learned counsel for respondents Nos.4 to 9 involve factual controversy that is not to be resolved by this Court in exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Hence, without giving any observation regarding factual aspects argued by the learned counsel for the private respondents this Court is of the opinion that the order passed by learned ex-officio Justice of Feace without keeping into consideration the legal aspects involved, is not maintainable being perverse.
For all mentioned above, the instant petition is allowed, the impugned order dated 07.09.2016 is set aside and respondent No,2 is directed to record the statement of the petitioner and proceed strictly in accordance with law.
However; if a criminal case is registered at the instance of the petitioner, the Investigation Officer shall receive and take into consideration all oral as well as documentary evidence if produced by the private respondents at an appropriate stage of the investigation.