1. ' The brief facts leading to this application are that S.D.P.O. Kambar ordered S.H.O. Drigh Police Station on 8-10-1994 that he has received the information from the reliable sources that Sono son of Haji Khan Chandio.
2. Muhammad Khan S/o Arab Tunio R/o Thori Bijar Taluka Kambar are men of bad character. There is general complaint for sheltering the criminals and arranging meals for them. As such he has directed the S.H.O. To challan the above named persons under section 110, Cr.P.C. And report compliance. On receiving such orders from the S.D.P.O., Kambar, S.H.O. Drigh Police Station filed a report being No,5 of 1994, dated 9-10-1994 under section 110/55, Cr.P.C. Against the present applicant before the S.D.M., Kambar and has shown the arrest of applicant/accused in judicial lock-up of Kambar where he was already detained in proceedings under section 109, Cr.P.C. Of Police Station, Kambar. S.D.M., Kambar on this report passed order under section 112, Cr.P.C. On the same day which was subsequently read over to the applicant under section 113, Cr.P.C. On 17-10- 1994 for which the applicant pleaded not guilty.
2. ' The main allegations against the applicant as laid down in the order of the S.D.M. Under section 112, Cr.P.C. Pare that he is by habit thief, patharidar and criminal; habitually harbours to other offenders and supplies meals to the criminals; that he receives and disposes of stolen property on payment of bhung and that he is father of famous dacoit Majoo Bijarani and that he aids his son in offences and supplies him weapons that he is so desparate and dangerous that his being at large without security is hazardous to the community.
3. ' The learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the allegations against the applicant are of stereo-type and mechanical one. They are vague and no specific incident has been quoted nor there is any private person cited as a witness and that only one proceeding has been shown against him to be under section 109, Cr.P.C. Filed by the S.H.O., P.S. Kambar which is also pending and has not been decided as yet. He has further argued that the applicant has been victimized due to party politics and the allegations levelled against him are stereo-type and are vague.
4. ' Mr. Abdul Fateh Mughal, Advocate for the State does not oppose the application and concedes and has stated that there was no material before the S.D.M., Kambar for taking cognizance and the allegations leveled against the applicant are stereo-type, as such he concedes.
5. ' I have heard the arguments of both the counsels and have also perused the record. It is a settled law that there should be some concrete evidence before initiating the proceedings and that only one proceeding under section 109, Cr.P.C. Has been cited against the applicant/accused and the rest of the allegations are of stereo-type. In both the cases not a single private person has been cited as a witness. On perusal, it reveals that the police has failed to give the details of crime, time and place of the alleged incidents. Bad reputation of the applicant is not supported by the evidence of any public person, mere mentioning by the police that the applicant has a bad reputation and his son is a dacoit and he is a notorious and criminal without specifying the instance or citing crime in which he is involved or the incidents of breach of peace, does not make a citizen liable to be prosecuted under section 110, Cr.P.C. The order under section 112, Cr.P.C. Was passed on 9-10-1994 for 12 months, almost 10 months have passed without any progress. I am of the view that continuing of the proceedings against the applicant which are pending since 9-10- 1994 are clearly abuse of the process of the Court.
6. ' In view of the above discussion, I quash the proceedings. Applicant is on bail, his bail bond is discharged accordingly.