1. ' The brief facts of this Criminal Miscellaneous Application are that one Muhammad All son of Ghulam Siddique Phull is booked under section 14 of Sindh Crimes Control Act by S.H.O., Police Station, Taluka Larkana on 13-2-1995 by way of filing a report to that effect before the Court of Sub- Divisional Magistrate and Tribunal, Larkana wherein he has stated that applicant is habitual criminal and criminals of different places used to visit him and he is committing crimes with them.
2. It is further alleged that applicant is providing food and supplying ammunition to the criminals and that he also disposes of theft properties by getting ransom and has got no source of income excepting living on the crimes. No public person is prepared to depose against him due to his fear.
3. S.H.O. Has acted as complainant and two police officials have been cited as witnesses and a list of seven cases has also been mentioned in the report in which applicant is said to be challaned.
4. Learned Tribunal after receiving the report, initiated proceedings and issued N.B.Ws. Against the applicant on 13-2-1995 and in the consequence of which the applicant was arrested and produced before learned S.D.M. And Tribunal, Larkana. Learned S.D.M. Passed order under section 14 of Sindh Crimes Control Act i,e, statement of allegations on 13-2-1995 and he also passed order under section 6 of Sindh Crimes Control Act on the same date and remanded the accused to judicial custody.
5. ' It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that proceedings have been initiated against the applicant by learned S.D.M. Larkana without applying mind to the facts of the case as there are only general and vague allegations without any concrete proof so much so that neither the date nor the time of incident has been mentioned in the complaint of the acts or crimes committed by the applicant. No proof from public in the shape of evidence has been produced to support the allegations. The result of the cases mentioned in the list in the complaint has also not been given to show that as to where these cases are pending or what is the result of the same by this time.
6. Nearly all the cases are old one therefore, it cannot be said that applicant is a habitual criminal.
7. Applicant at the same time was also booked in 110, Cr.P.C. Proceedings on the same allegations which proceedings have been earlier quashed by this Court. Therefore, these proceedings are also liable to be quashed. He has relied upon 1977 PCr.LJ 746, 1994 PCr.LJ 1, 4 and 1779.
8. ' Mr. Yar Muhammad Abbasi, Advocate for A.A.-G. Supports the contentions raised by learned counsel for applicant and submits that in view of the rulings cited, he has got no objection if the proceedings are quashed.
9. ' I have gone through the R&Ps. Of this proceeding. It is pertinent to note that the report/complaint has been prepared by S.H.O., Police Station, Taluka Larkana on 13-2-1995 and he has produced the same in the Court of learned S.D.M. And Tribunal, Larkana on the same date and has obtained N.B.Ws. On the same date. The applicant was also produced before the S.D.M. And Tribunal, Larkana on 13-2-1995 and the statement of allegations i,e, order under section 14 of Sindh Crimes Control Act has been passed on the same date so much so order under section 6 of Sindh Crimes Control Act has also been passed on 13-2-1995 and applicant is remanded to the custody thereafter without further passing order under section 83(a) or (b) of Sindh Crimes Control Act. It is against the very spirit of natural justice that entire material has been prepared against the applicant on the one and the same date and all the above said orders have been passed at one and same time without affording any opportunity to the applicant to prepare his defence. It is also not in accordance with the legal provisions that the report is filed on 13-2-1995 in the Court of learned S.D.M. And Tribunal, Larkana and N.B.W. Is issued on the same date and order mentioning the allegations and order under section 6 of Sindh Crimes Control Act are passed on the one and same date and applicant is remanded thereafter. Admittedly no order under section 8(3)(a) and
(b) of Sindh Crimes Control Act is passed, as such, applicant cannot be remanded to custody in absence of passing of this order which is an illegality not curable under any law. On factual aspect also there are only vague and general allegations without any concrete proof of the incidents or acts complained against. The cases cited are also old one and no one from public has been cited as witness to depose about his character, as such, the proceedings are not sustainable in law and the same are quashed. The Criminal Miscellaneous Application No,57 of 1995 is hereby allowed.
10. ' These are the reasons for quashment of proceedings, quashed on 4-5-1995 by a short order.