' NASIR ASLAM ZAHID, J.---Petitioner/complainant has sought leave against the order dated 12-12- 1996 of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court dismissing his writ petition in limine. We have heard Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Vehniwal, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner.
2. On 25-4-1994, on the complaint of the petitioner, F.I.R. Was registered at Police Station Samundri, District Faisalabad, against respondent No,4 Inayat Ali under sections 506 and 452, P.P.C. According to the petitioner, accused used to visit the house of petitioner's uncle who had young daughters and on the day of the incidentals, late at night, respondent/accused was restrained by him not to visit the house of the petitioner's uncle stating that people were talking about respondent's visit to petitioner's uncle house and it was a question of honour and prestige. According to the complaint, the accused flared up and took out his carbine on which the petitioner ran towards his house but was chased by the accused who came inside the house of the petitioner and also kicked his wife and there were several witnesses who gathered there at the time of the incident who saved the petitioner and his family from the accused. It is further alleged in the complaint that the accused then went away holding up his carbine in the air and advancing threats of killing the petitioner.
According to learned counsel for the petitioner, in the first investigation the accused was found to be innocent, but in the subsequent investigation by an A.S.P., the accused was found involved and a direction was given to the S.H.O. To arrest the accused and to put up challan in Court. The accused was then arrested on 19-8-1994 and taken before the Allaqa Magistrate who was on leave and, therefore, he was produced before the Duty Magistrate. The police asked for physical remand of the accused but the same was refused by the Magistrate and instead the accused was discharged. By the said order dated 20-8-1994, the Magistrate did not give any remand and discharged the accused stating that the accused appeared to be not involved in the offence and that he was involved in the case although he was innocent and that earlier he had been found innocent during investigation. No mention was made about the second investigation by a higher officer who had found the accused involved in the offence.
' Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed a writ petition before the Lahore High Court which has been dismissed by the impugned order. A perusal of the impugned order shows that no reasons have been given for dismissal of the writ petition. In the first paragraph, the facts are mentioned as stated above and then the writ petition was dismissed as follows:-- "I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. In the circumstances narrated above, the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate was perfectly legal and no interference is called for. The petitioner if so advised may file private complaint. With the abovesaid observation the writ petition is dismissed."
3. Leave is granted to consider whether the Magistrate could discharge the A accused/respondent No,4 without giving any reasons despite report of the ' A.S.P. That the accused was involved in the offence and the High Court was right in dismissing the writ petition by a non-speaking order.