' IJAZ-UL-HASSAN, J.--- Invoking Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199, petitioner Muhammad Daud Khan, seeks quashment of the impugned F.I.R. No,707 registered at Police Station Tangi, District Charsadda on 28-8-1999 under sections 419/420/468/411, P.P.C. At the behest of Tehsildar Sheikh Javed Ahmad Khan, respondent No,2 herein.
2. The facts of the case which we have been able to gather from the record of the case are that Yaqoob Khan alias Chacha Khan and Yunas Khan are real brothers. Mst. Saira, Mst. Zainab and Mst.
Shandana are daughters of Muhammad Yunas Khan whereas Shahid Khan, Ishaq Khan and Faisal Khan are sons of Yaqoob Khan. Mst. Saira was married to Shahid Khan and Mst. Zainab was married to Ishaq Khan, while Mst. Shandana was married to Faisal Khan. Agricultural land measuring 550 Jaribs situated in Qaid Abad, District Charsadda was alienated in favour of Mst.
Saira and her sister, in lieu of their dower by Yaqoob Khan father of the respective husbands of the brides, arraigned as respondents Nos.4 to 6 herein. According to the mentioned respondents, after some time Yaqoob Khan their father-in-law asked them to retransfer the land back to him and that when they declined to do so he (Yaqoob Khan) turned against them and asked his sons to force their respective wives to accede to his demand and part with the land under reference.
Subsequently, some other women were produced before the Sub- Registrar, Tangi pretending them to be Mst. Saira, Mst, Zainab and Mst. Shandana and thus knowingly substituted other persons for the above named girls. The petitioner, real brother of Muhammad Yaqoob Khan and Muhammad Yunas Khan, acted as identifier and the attesting witness in the aforesaid fraudulent transaction. Respondents Nos.4 to 6 approached the higher authorities and criminal case was registered and investigation was started. Yaqoob Khan succeeded to obtain favourable reports from Forensic Science Laboratory, Peshawar. The matter was probed and two Inspectors of F.S.L.
Peshawar were suspended from the service. The signatures of respondents Nos.4 to 6 were sent to the Federal Investigation Agency (F.I.A.) Islamabad for verification. The result of the F.I.A. Laboratory was communicated to the N.-W.F.P. Police wherein it was held that the signatures of respondents 4 to 6 were forged and the report of the F.S.L., Peshawar was incorrect.
3. Qazi Muhammad Jamil, Advocate for the petitioner attempted to argue that his client who happens to be an uncle of the donor has no interest ii the property, being transferred to the respective children of the donor who are under the guardianship of their mother donor; that the matter if it is disputed is of civil nature, therefore, not amenable to the investigation of a criminal case; that after the report of F.S.L., Peshawar with regard to the genuineness of the disputed signatures there is no room left for further investigation in the matter; that Federal Investigation Agency, Islamabad has no jurisdiction to investigate the matter and that the F.I.R. And the investigation launched thereupon is mala fide and respondent No,1 is not competent to lodge F.I.R.
Against the petitioner in terms of section 83 of the Registration Act (XVI of 1908).
4. Mr. Imtiaz Ali, learned Additional Advocate-General for respondents Nos.1 and 2, Mr. Hamid Farooq Durrani learned Dy.A.-G. For respondent No,3 and Mr. Jehanzeb Rahim, Barrister for respondents Nos.4 to 6, on the contrary maintained that Mst. Saira and her sisters were victim of fraud in the entire proceedings and they were deprived of very valuable agricultural property through repeated acts of fraud and cheating which motivated them to approach the higher authorities and respondent No,2 for taking an appropriate action in the matter.
5. We have had the advantage of hearing arguments of learned counsel for the parties in the light of the material on file.
6. The F.I.R. Sought to be quashed prima facie discloses commission of cognizable offence which requires investigation to be conducted in order to find out truth and the same could not be stifled or killed in Constitutional petition as rightly urged by learned counsel for respondents. The superior Courts in Pakistan are always loath to interfere with police investigation which exclusively falls within their domain and in which the law imposes upon them the duty of inquiry and further the function of the Courts and the Investigating Agency are complimentary and not overlapping as the finding of one can be substituted for other. The petitioner, after conclusion of inquiry and submission of report under section 173, Cr.P.C. Could, if feels aggrieved, invoke the provisions of Cr.P.C. For his discharge or acquittal or quashment of proceedings before the competent Court and not at the stage when the investigation is yet to take its normal course. The petitioner is the identifier as well as the attesting witness in the entire transaction and is alleged to have actively facilitated the commission of offence. The petitioner has failed to point out any jurisdictional defect or infraction of a mandatory provision of law in the registration of F.I.R. And investigation of the case and, therefore, the petition is not maintainable. The petition fails which is hereby dismissed.