1. ' Mehar Police on 15-9-1996 submitted report in the Court of S.D.M., Mehar alleging therein that S.I.P.
2. Bajhi Khan of Police Station, Mehar was on patrol duty alongwith his subordinate staff. Police at about 3-00 p.m. Reached in Shahi Bazzar Mehar and found that one person was watching the pockets of other people, on seeing police personnel in uniform he was trembling and was subsequently arrested by the police. On inquiry he gave his name as Niaz Ahmed alias Niaz Hussain son of Qadir Bux Junejo, resident of Khairpur Nathan Shah. On suspicion he was taken into custody and search was carried on. During which one blade and two keys were secured from the pocket of the shirt of the applicant (Niaz Ahmed) and was asked to give surety but he could not produce the same, therefore, was arrested. Mashirnama was prepared by the police on spot. The report further shows that applicant is not of a good character anc' police submitted a report under section 109, Cr.P.C. In the report witnesses were cited as complainant Bajhi Khan, Muhammad Moosa, Constable B-805 and Ghulam Mustafa Constable B-3191 of Police Station Mehar.
3. Subsequently accused was produced before learned S.D.M., who directed the applicant to furnish surety in the sum of Rs,500 and P.R. Bond in the like amount, but applicant failed to furnish surety, as such he was remanded to jail custody and matter was adjourned to 22-9-1996. Being aggrieved by this order applicant submitted criminal revision before Sessions Court, Larkana which was subsequently transferred to the Court of IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Dadu, being Criminal Revision No,9 of 1996. The matter proceeded before IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Dadu who observed that on 17-9-1996 applicant furnished surety before S.D.M. But no order regarding acceptance or rejecting the surety was passed. Even no diary for 17-9-1996 was written down.
4. Finding this as highhandedness of S.D.M. While detaining the applicant in the jail, applicant was directed to furnish surety in the Court of IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Dadu, and subsequently was released on bail.
5. ' Mr. Muhammad Hashim Chandio, learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is respectable Zamindar who filed Civil Suit No,31 of 1996 against the Province of Sindh Government functionaries and Mst. Murad Khatoon, Ghulam Mustafa, Aijaz and Ghulam Muhammad as defendants for declaration, permanent injunction and cancellation of entry, dated 2-1-1996 in favour of defendant No,6. The S.D.M. Of the area pressurised the applicant to withdraw the said suit, in case of non-compliance of the orders of the S.D.M., applicant was threatened by the S.D.M. To face the consequences. Subsequently at the behest of S.D.M., Mehar namely Rana Muhammad Ehsan proceedings under section 109, Cr.P.C. Were initiated by the Mehar Police. Copy of the civil suit has also been filed which is Annexure "F" of this application at page 33.
6. ' Mr. Chandio has also pointed out that Annexure "E-1" page 25 copy of the telegram which was dispatched by the brother of the applicant to the Honorable . Chief Justice High Court of Sindh, Home Secretary, Revenue Secretary, Government of Sindh alleging therein that applicant Niaz Hussain has been arrested by the police at the instance of S.D.M., Mehar who is pressurizing the applicant to withdraw Suit No,31 of 1996 filed by Niaz Hussain applicant and his brother Khadim Hussain against Government Functionaries, Mst. Murad Khatoon and others whom S.D.M., Mehar is supporting illegally. Mr. Muhammad Hashim Chandio has also produced copy of the report submitted by S.H.O., Khairpur Nathan Shah as an inquiry report, in which it has been submitted that case against the applicant/accused was false one and was initiated at the instance of S.D.M., Mehar. Mr. Chandio contends that there is no previous criminal record or any conviction against the applicant, that false vague report has been submitted by the police and applicant has already suffered a lot. Mr. Chandio has cited Ghulam Shabir v. The State 1993 PCr.LJ 146, wherein proceedings under section 110. Cr.P.C. Were initiated in the Court of S.D.M., Khairpur but the report filed against Ghulam Shabir was found as vague containing general allegations without previous record of conviction and the proceedings were quashed.
7. ' Mr. Riyaz Hussain Mughal, learned Assistant Advocate-General under these circumstances has pointed that there was no material available with the police to initiate the proceedings, whereas entire proceedings were carried on at the instance of S.D.M., Mehar. Learned Assistant Advocate- General concedes that the application may be granted and the proceedings may be quashed.
8. I have gone through the material placed with the case, the report of the police itself is vague without specific instances or previous criminal record/conviction. The telegrams which were dispatched to the higher authorities referred hereinabove and the Civil Suit bearing No,31 of 1996 filed by the applicant as plaintiff along with his brother showing therein that Mst. Murad Khatoon and Ghulam Mustafa and others as defendants and version of the applicant gets support that he was being pressurized by the S.D.M. To withdraw the suit from the (Court) order of the learned IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Dadu referred hereinabove in the earlier part of this judgment in which applicant was released from jail by the learned IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Dadu, observing that applicant was remanded to custody by the S.D.M. Which was highhandedness on his part.
9. ' The Government functionaries are required to act in an equitable manner and decide and pass the orders keeping in view the principle of equity, fair play justice and malice to none. Whereas in this case the applicant was remanded to jail custody by the S.D.M. Without proper orders, without mentioning proper diary of the case which suggests that S.D.M. Has misused his c authority and applicant has been dragged to face the proceedings under section 109, Cr.P.C., who on the contrary appears to be a respectable and land owning Khatedar.
10. ' I see no substance in the police report and subsequent proceedings pending before S.D.M., Mehar.
11. The case-law cited by Mr. Muhammad Hashim Chandio is relevant, applicable to the facts of the case which I respectfully follow. For the foregoing reasons 1 allow the application and quash the proceedings pending in the Court of S.D.M., Mehar against the applicant under section 109/55, Cr.P.C. Order accordingly.