1. ' Heard the applicant as well as learned A.A.-G. The facts of the case are that on 17-4-1995, S.H.O., Police Station Gharo made a report against the applicant in the Court of S.D.M., Sakro mentioning therein that the applicant cheats the people, sells plots of the land after occupying the same by force, and that people are not ready to give evidence against him as they are afraid of him. The request has been made that the applicant be proceeded against, under provisions of section 14 of Sindh Crimes Control Act. The police record shows that the previous cases against the applicant as under:--
(1) F.I.R. No,72/85 for an offence under section 124, P.P.C. Challaned.
(2) Crime No,12/95 for an offence under section 406/420, P.P.C. Challaned.
(3) Criminal proceedings No,8/92, under section 107/151, Cr.P.C.
(4) Crime No,64/77 for an offence under section 382/34, P.P.C. Challaned.
2. The report does not show that the applicant had been convicted in any of the cases. On the contrary the applicant has placed on record a certified true copy Of the judgment of the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Thatta, showing that applicant had been acquitted in case against him challaned under section 124-A, P.P.C. The applicant was acquitted in the year 1988. As regards the case under section 406/420, P.P.C., the applicant has not been 'Shown to have been convicted. The applicant states that this case is still pending. The proceedings under sections 107, 151, Cr.P.C., which were instituted about 4 years back have come to an end. Thus, the police recard does not show that applicant is a habitual criminal. The contention of the applicant is that police has acted mala fidely as he had filed a case against one S.I.P. Abdul Aziz Qureshi of Police Station Gharo for offence under sections 342, 344/504, P.P.C. And 337-A (1), 337-F/1, Qisas and Diyat Ordinance, in the Court of Civil Judge and F.C.M., Mirpur Sakro on 29-5-1994 i,e, about one year prior to the initiating of these criminal proceedings against him. Even otherwise ingredients of section 14 of the Sindh Crimes Control Act, are not attracted, as the details of the offences committed by the applicant with their time and place of occurrence and other important features are not brought before the notice of the S.D.M. Apart from that, provisions of sections 5 and 6 of the Sindh Crimes Control Act, were also not complied with, inasmuch as the details required by law were not furnished in the report. The cases reported as 1993 PCr.LJ 2499, 1992 PCr.LJ 2248, 1993 PCr.LJ 455 and 1993 PCr.LJ 1378 and many other cases decided by this Court have laid a principle that the report filed against the applicants by the police does not attract the provisions of Sindh Crimes Control Act, in such cases and that such cases are liable to be quashed. Syed Amjad Ali Shah. A.A.-G. Frankly conceded to this position and stated that under these circumstances, the proceedings against the applicant are liable to be quashed as otherwise they will amount to abusing the process of this Court. Taking the above arguments and the record in view, Criminal Miscellaneous No,222 of 1995 is allowed and the proceedings under section 14 of the Sindh Crimes Control Act, pending against the applicant in the Court of S.D.M., Mirpur Sakro on report, dated 17-4-1995 of Police Station Gharo, is hereby quashed.