ALI BAIG, , C.J. The instant Criminal Appeal bearing No.02/2021 has been filed by the present appellant against the judgment/order dated 28-6-2021 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Skardu, whereby the learned Judicial Magistrate has acquitted the accused/ respondent from the charges levelled against him in case FIR No.06/2019 registered at Police Station Hussain Abad for offences under sections 337-A, 504, 506(ii), P.P.C.
2. The learned counsel, for the appellant submitted that the judgment/ order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate is against the law and against the material available on record. The learned counsel for the appellant further argued that the prosecution has successfully proved their case through reliable evidence but the learned Judicial Magistrate has passed the impugned judgment/order in a hasty manner and acquitted the accused/respondent under section 249-A, Cr.P.C. Lastly the learned counsel for the appellant argued that the learned Judicial Magistrate despite recording evidence of the investigating officer passed the impugned judgment/order, hence, the judgment/ order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate is liable to be set aside.
3. I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant and have minutely gone through record available on file.
4. From perusal of record it appears that on complaint of the present appellant a criminal case bearing FIR No. 06/2019 was registered under sections 337-A, 504, 506-II, P.P.C. at Police Station Hussainabad against the present respondent/accused and after registration of the criminal case the concerned SHO started investigation and after completion of usual investigation submitted complete challan before the learned Judicial Magistrate Skardu. The learned Judicial Magistrate after taken cognizance in the matter framed charge against the respondent/accused, to which the respondent/accused had denied charges and claimed trial. The learned trial Court recorded statement of four witnesses including the complainant /present appellant.
5. It is pertinent to mention here that during proceedings before the learned Judicial Magistrate the accused/ respondent had filed an application under section 249-A, Cr.P.C. for his acquittal on the grounds detailed in the petition. The learned Judicial Magistrate after hearing arguments on behalf of both the parties has allowed the application and acquitted the accused/respondent under section 249-A, Cr.P.C. The PWs produced by the prosecution do not support the prosecution version and the prosecution has badly failed to prove its version against the present respondent/ accused as the alleged eye-witnesses have resiled from their previous statements recorded before the police under section 161, Cr.P.C. The judgment/order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate is well reasoned and correct appreciation of material available on file and further proceedings in the matter will be futile exercise and wastage of precious time of the Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to point out any material irregularity or illegality in the impugned judgment/order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate warranting interference of this Court.
6. In view of above, this criminal appeal has no force and the same is dismissed in limine by upholding the impugned Judgment/order dated 28.06.2021 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Skardu. File.