ABDUL MAALIK GADDI, J.--- Through this petition, petitioners Nadir Ali and others, seek jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, for quashment of FIR No.219 of 2016 dated 25.11.2016 registered under sections 506/2, 420, 147, 148 and 149, P.P.C. of Police Station Sakrand, District Shaheed Benazirabad.
2. Facts of the case as narrated by complainant Niaz Hussain son of Khuda Buldish Khoso in the said FIR in his verbatim are as under: "It is to complain that about 4 years ago, my father took loan of total Rs.540,000/- on different times for one year for the treatment of my mother from namely Mashooque Ali Mari 2. Ali Asghar Mari 3. Nadir Ali Mari. Mashooque Ali Mari gave-Rs.260,000/- on which, my father gave him open cheque Nos. (1) 38689878 (2) 38659879 (3)
AC0871328 (4) 38689877 AA0735230 (6) AA0735231 (7) AA0735232 (8) AA0735229 of account No.1741-0 of NBP Sakrand as security . Ali Asghar Mari gave Rs.230,000/- to whom gave cheque Nos. (1) AA0735235 (2)
AA0735236 (3) AA0735237 (4) AA0735238 (5) AC0871729 (5) AC0871330 (6) AC071331 (7) AC0871331 (7)
AC0871332 (8) AC0871333. Nadir Ali Mari gave total Rs.50,000/- to whom gave open cheque Nos. (1) 8317345 (2)
20960353 (3) 8317321 (4) 8317332 (5) 8317222 of account No.0029279251 of UBL Sakrand and cheque Nos. (1)
83689881 (2) AK0137325 (3) AK0137309 (4) AK0137308 (5) AK0137310 (6) 45482 69 (7) 4548270 (8) 4548272 (9)
4548274 of account No.1741-0 of NBP Sakrand. On fixed time, Mashooque Ali Mari obtained Rs. 900,000/- from us while imposing interest and blackmailing us, Asghar Ali Mari obtained Rs.600,00 0/- and Nadir Ali Mari obtained Rs.160,000/-. We have given total Rs.1,660,000/- to all three accused persons. We went to above said accused persons for return of our given cheques on different times, who used to pressurize us while saying we will not return cheques to you and if you will pay as more amount as interest, then we will think'. Then we gave such complains with Nekmards of locality , on which, the said accused further enraged and continue extending us threats that we will not spare you and will kill you. Today , I and my brother Khadim Hussain and brother Noor Hussain were coming to Sakrand town on our motorcycle and when at about 06:00 p.m. reached near Syed Cotton Factory , where saw that the accused each Mashooque Ali son of Jamshar Mari, Ali Asghar son of Ali Gul, Nadir Ali on of &Qat, Manthar Ali son of Jamsher Ali, Sikandar Ali son of Ghulam Nabi, Imamuddin son of Qalandar Bux, Mohram son of not known, all by caste Mari, all residents of village Mariabad near Fatehpu r and WAPDA Colony , Sakrand came an three motorcycles in front of our motorcycle, stopped us, took our pistols from their folds, pointed upon us, said that you have tormented us and we will not spare you ,and, will kill you. We raised cries due to fear of weapons and nearby people intervened and rescued our lives. Then all the accused persons went away by hopping on their motorcycle while extending murderous threats. Now I appear and complain that investigation may be done."
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as was as learned State Counsel and perused the material ayailable on record with their able assistance.
4. In the present case FIR has already been registered against the petitioners and investigation is in progress. At this stage case of the petitioners cannot be considered under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Moreover , this Court would refrain from rendering any finding on the merits of the case, which may prejudice case of the petitioners in any manner whatsoever and considers that legal and factual issues raised in the present petition can be taken by petitioners in the first instance before the investigating officer and then even before framing of the charge by the trial Court has the power to discharges the petitioners or otherwise.
5. Moreover , the august Supreme Court of Pakistan in case titled Nasreen Bibi v. Farrukh Shahzad and others (Criminal Appeal No.280 of 2013) decided on 04.02.2014 while dilating upon, simila r question of law has upheld its earlier view which reads as under: "During the hearing of this appeal a consensus has developed between the learned counsel for the appellant the framed counsel representing respondent No.1 and the learned Additional Advocate-General, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa to the effect that the impugned judgment passed by a learned Judge-in-Chamber of the Peshawar High Court, Abbottabad Bench is not sustainable in law because the criminal case in hand was still at its investigation stage, when the said judgment was passed and at the investigation stage of a criminal case the provisions of section 561- A, Cr.P.C. do not ;kind attracted. This consensus of opinion between the learned counsel for the parties and the learned Law Officer finds support from the cases of Emperor v. Khwaja Nazir Ahmed (AIR (32) 1945 Pirvy Council 18), Shahnaz Begum v. The Hon'ble Judges of the High Court of Sindh and Baluch istan and another (PLD 1971 SC 677) and Nazir Ahmed and others v. Muhammad Shafi and another (PLD 1980 SC 6). In this view of the legal position this appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment passed by the learned Judge-in- Chamber of the Peshawar High Court, Abbottabad Bench on 27.08.2013 is set aside."
6. During course of arguments we have specifically asked a question from the learned counsel for the petitioners that whether in this matter case has been challaned, to which he replied in negative and submitted that matter is still under investigation. It appears that the investigation is stopped in this case because grant of stay by this Court.
In our view the Court cannot stop the investigation of the crime especially when no male fide is alleged against Investigating Officer of the case. In view of the factual controversy involved in this case, the petitioners have adequate alternative remedy available under the law for redressal of their grievance to place their case before the Investigating Of ficer and if not accepted by the Investigating Of ficer then to the concerned Judicial Magistrate.
7. In view of above, since the case is still under investigation, therefore, we find no merit in this constitutional petition, which is dismissed along with listed application(s). Office is directed to immediately send a copy of this order to SSP Shaheed Benazir Abad and concerned Judicial Magistrate for information and compliance.
8. This petition was dismissed in earlier part of the day in open Court after hearing learned counsel for the parties and these are the detailed reasons thereof.