1. The short point on which this revision application must succeed is that whereas learned Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Civil Lines, Karachi took action against the petitioner on Police report dated 3- 5-1976 under section 110, Cr. P. C. On 28-5-1976 and fixed the hearing of the case for 25-6-1976, he did not make any order under section 112, Cr. P. C. Until the petitioner appeared in Court on 25-6- 1976. Mr. S. Nasiruddin also complains that the Police report, ever, if it be true, does not attract the mischief of section 110, Cr. P. C. It at best may be construed as being one under section 107, Cr. P. C.
2. An relies upon the decisions in Abdul Qadir and others v. The State , Mehar Khan v. The State and Noor Mohammad alias Nootul v. The State .
3. Mr. Mohammad Ramean Qureshi learned counsel appearing for the State, very frankly conceded to the legal points raised on behalf of the petitioner and he does not, therefore, support the impugned order passel by the learned Sub-, Divisional Magistrate, Civil Lines, Karachi.
4. ' The position in law is clear that it is only after the Magistrate makes an order under section 112, Cr.
5. P. C. That he can proceed further on the report or complaint under section 107, 108, 109 or 110, Cr. P.
6. C., and since the provisions of section 112, Cr. P. C. Have been held to be mandatory in nature, and not merely directory, their disregard is fatal to the proceedings set up against the petitioner.
7. On this ground alone, apart from the other points raised by Mr. S. Nasiruddin, this application must succeed and is, therefore, allowed, with the result that the proceedings initiated against the petitioner by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Civil Lines, Karachi under section 110, Cr. P. C. In respect of which he passed order dated 25-6-1976 under section 112, Cr. P. C. Are quashed. 1 2 3