Citation Name: 2025 YLR 1152 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Malik Saghir Ahmad Nazir vs State Ss

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Citation Name: 2025 YLR 1152 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Malik Saghir Ahmad Nazir VS State Ss. 561-a & 173---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 392, 397 & 34---Robbery, robbery or dacoity with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt, common intention---Quashing of FIR proceedings---Pursuant to the registration of FIR, investigation followed and in due course the police submitted a report under S.173, Cr.P.C against four accused including the present petitioner---Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and accepted the challan---Petitioner sought quashing of order passed by the Judicial Magistrate on the grounds that the impugned order was illegal, unlawful, improper, incorrect and based on evasive findings and without application of conscious judicial mind---Validity---admittedly, the respondent No.2 was an advocate by profession---Per claim of the applicant, he was assistant Engineer in K-Electric---On the fateful day applicant along with his team was on official duty assigned to prevent theft of electricity when he received information that K-Electric cable was dumped in an open plot so while calling police on helpline he reached the pointed plot and was busy in capturing photographs from his mobile phone---Some persons including the respondent No.2 came there, beat the applicant and forcibly took him to a Dera where too he was subjected to torture and then was handed over to police---Record was suggestive of the fact that after registration of the case, the Investigating Officer produced the applicant in Court where per claim of the applicant, respondent No.2/ complainant along with other advocates was already present, and they beat the applicant in police custody within Court premises---Record further reflected that applicant obtained protective bail from the High Court and along with his counsel went to the Court of Judicial Magistrate for submission of certain documents where respondent No.2/ complainant with the help of his companion lawyers again mishandled the applicant and his counsel, who saved his life by taking shelter in the chamber of the Judicial Magistrate---Such incident was reported to Police Station, Sessions Judge, as well as Registrar of the High Court---During investigation, the Investigating Officer confirmed that the applicant was on official duty and he called police through its helpine---Medical Certificate also suggested that applicant was beaten and maltreated---Based on such material, the previous Investigating Officer prepared his report and recommended disposal of case under "B" class, but instead of accepting such report, the high-ups of police ordered transfer of investigation perhaps due to influence of complainant and thereafter the second Investigating Officer submitted challan and cognizance was taken by Court---Certain aspects regarding basic/constituting elements of offence or version of the applicant collected during already conducted investigation could not be taken into consideration either by the second Investigating Officer or by the Judicial Magistrate while accepting the report under S.173, Cr.P.C., wherein an advocate was complainant, which raised significant implications for the legal profession---One version put-forth by the applicant and the other taken by the complainant, if seen in juxtaposition, then the version of the applicant, in the background of previous investigation, seemed to be true whereas the plea taken by the complainant seemed to be based on mala fide intention and prima facie reflected ulterior motives and did not appeal to reason---Bare perusal of the impugned order, revealed that the same had been passed in haste without application of conscious judicial mind, overlooking peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, which could not be sustained in the eyes of law---application was allowed, impugned order was set-aside and proceedings emanating from the FIR were quashed.

Citation Name: 2025 YLR 1152 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Malik Saghir Ahmad Nazir vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 1152 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR