The proceedings pending and action taken and orders passed against the applicant under the Sind Crimes Control Act, 1975, by S.D.M. And Tribunal, Larkana, are challenged in the present petition. I have heard Mr. Hussain Shah Rashdi, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Sanaullah Khan, learned counsel for the State.
2. The proceedings under the Sind Crimes Control Act, 1975, wer initiated against the applicant on the report, dated 11-12-1986 of S.H.O Town Police Station, Larkana. A perusal of the report, on which cognizance was taken and orders passed against the applicant, shows the not a single specific allegation has been made out against the applicant. There are only vague and general allegations.
Learned counsel for the applicant refers to section 6 of the Sind Crimes Control Act, 1975, and submits that according to the provisions of this section, details and times of the specific actions alleged against the accused are to be mentioned in the report submitted to the S.D.M./Tribunal and unless there is compliance of such mandatory provisions, cognizance cannot be taken by the Tribunal. It is contended by the learned counsel that these provisions are mandatory and he submits that there are scores of reported decisions of this Court and he cites 1985 P Cr. L J 2837; 1986 P Cr. L J 30 and PLD 198 Kar. 648 as three decisions which support the contention of the learned, counsel.
10 Mr. Sanaullah Khan, learned counsel for the State, states that there is no alternative with him except to concede that this is a matter which requires quashment of proceedings. I am also of the same view.
3. Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 1850 of 1986 is allowed and the proceedings pending and orders passed against applicant Shabbir Ahmed son of Sardar Ahmed Sultan Chandio under the