SARDAR MUHAMMAD SARFRAZ DOGAR, J.---By means of the instant petition in terms of Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakis tan, 1973, the petitioner namely Bushar a Ghias has voiced against the order dated 25.3.2014 passed by learned Ex-Of ficio Justice of the Peace, Lahore, on an application under sections 22-A and 22-B, Cr.P.C., lodged by respondent No,3, whereby , SHO concerned was directed to record the version of respondent No,3 and proceed further in accordance with the law .
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that Ex-Of ficio Justice of Peace has passed the impugned order arbitrarily and summarily without appreciating the fact that petition under sections 22-A/22-B, Cr.P.C. was filed by respondent No,3 in a malicious and mala fide manner .
3. On the other hand, learned Law Officer has supported the order impugned herein this petition. Learned counsel for respondent No,3 has not turned up and there is no intimation with regard to his absence as well.
4. Heard. Record perused.
5. The record evinces that respondent No,3 has lodged an application under sections 22-A and 22-B, Cr.P.C. before the learned Ex-Of ficio Justice of the Peace alleging therein that on 13.3.2014, at about 10.00 p.m. the petitioner along with her accomplice while armed with different weapons trespassed in his house after breaking the wall and started demolishing his house in order to take possession of the same. The report and parawise comments have been requisitioned from the SHO concerned by the learned Ex-Of ficio Justice of the Peace, which depicted that both the parties belonged to same family and there is a dispute of property between them for which civil suits are also pending adjudication. The report and parawise comments requisitioned by this Court are also available on the file, wherein, the SHO concerned has reported that no such occurrence has took place and respondent No,3 wanted to involve the petitioner in false litigation as the alleged occurrence has not been verified by the people of vicinity .
6. Moreover , respondent No,3 has not produced any cogent evidence in support of his allegations. The Justice of Peace without applying his mind passed a mechanical order , by not even considering the Police Report, which would encourage the trend already in vogue to manage to get an order against the petitioner . Even otherwise, respondent No,3 did not approach the Court with clean hands and apparently had withheld and concealed the material facts.
7. It has been held in "Khizer Hayat and others v. Inspector General of Police (Punjab) Lahore and others (PLD 2005 Lahore 470) that it was emphasized that it was advisable for the Justice of Peace to call for the Police Report. The sole object of this mechanism is to bring the true facts on record. Though it was not obligatory for the Justice of Peace to call for the Police Report, but once the Police Report is called for, the Justice of Peace cannot ordinarily brush it aside. And in case the Justice of Peace who proposed to air an order contrary to the Police Report, in addition, he was also supposed to furnish tangible reasons for not relying upon the solicited Police Report. Dictum of law as laid down by the aforesaid authoritative and celebrated judgment was followed in the cases report as "Khalid Anwar v. Ex Officio Justice of Peac e Lahore and 3 others " (2013 PCr.LJ 684) and "Mureed Hussain v . Additional Sessions Judge/Justice of Peace Jampur and 3 others " (2014 PCr .LJ 1 146).
8. For the above diagnosed reasons, it is a fit case for interference and invalidation of the impugned order .
Therefore, by allowing this petition, impugned order dated 25.3.2014 passed by the learned Ex-Of ficio Justice of Peace, Lahore is set-aside. However , the respondent No,3 is at liberty to avail alternate remedy of filing private complaint for redressal of his grievance, if so advised, and if any such complaint is filed, the learned court concerned shall decide the same strictly on its own merits in accordance with law without being influenced by the observations of any orders of the Court.