1. The applicant has filed this Criminal Revision in connection with crime No, 14 of 1999 registered with Police Station Rehmatpur under sections 302 and 337-H (ii), P.P.C. Briefly the facts are that the complainant alongwith his cousins were sitting in the hotel. His brother was also joined him when his brother left. He heard cries and alongwith one Abdul Sattar they rushed out and saw Shahbaz Ali armed with gun, Sobho armed with Pistol, Dino armed with Pistol, Hassan and others who had also with them Lathies and Dandas. Amir Ali and Dino fired at Illahi Bux and Hassan Ali caused Danda blows on the face of Illahi Bux. Shouts were raised and there after the accused ran away after firing in the air F.I.R. was registered and police investigated the case and, a challan was submitted. In the challan the name of Shahbaz Ali and Dino the present applicants were kept in column No,
2. However, the learned trial Court was of the opinion that the placement of the two names was unjustified and taking the cognizance of the fact that the two accused had certain role play, he directed that they should also be made as co-accused and proceedings were initiated against them also. The complainant had moved an application .under section 193, Cr.P.C. and it is on this basis that it was ordered that the two applicants should again be implicated.
2. The learned counsel has claimed that a plain reading of the F.I.R. would clearly show that the two applicants at the most can be vicarious liable. No special role has been attributed to them, save and except their names are appearing in the F.I.R. He also challenged the fact that once the two applicants had been placed in column No, 2, there after to once again to implicate against them was unwarranted. Learned counsel has relied on certain case laws.
3. I have looked at the file and heard the learned counsels for the petitioners and the State. While, the role of Shahbaz Ali the applicant No, I is indeed limited in the F.I.R., the role of Dino is specific. Dino and Amir Ali have tired at Illahi Bux and Hassan Ali has hit him at the face with Danda. Collectively this has resulted in death of the person. The implication of Shahbaz Ali is, therefore, unjustified as he has no specific role attributed to him in the F.I.R. On the other hand, the role of Dino is very clear.
4. The question of whether the trial Court can implicate persons after the names have been placed in column No, 2 is settled. However, the trial Court should exercise due care in connecting the person in crime again as there has to be sufficient material connecting the persons in the alleged offence.
5. The record of the material available should be one available by the Investigating Authority.
6. The revision application, however, is allowed as it has been held in the case of Inayatullah and 4 others v. The State (1999 P.Cr.L.J-731) that the provisions of 173 are not available to the complainant who if he is . dissatisfied with the decision of the Investigating Agency could file a direct complaint.
7. The facility of recourse to 173 are not available to the complainant.