Case Details

Citation(s)
2025 SLG 5297 2025 SLD 5297 = 2025 PCRLJ 1320
Sindh High Court, Larkana Bench
Cr. Misc. Application No. S-40 of 2025, decided on 10th March, 2025.
Before Khalid Hussain Shahani, J
Habibullah G. Ghouri for Applicant. Muhammad Afzal Jagirani for
Respondent No. 4. Nazir Ahmed Bhangwar, DPG for the State.

AIJAZ MEHMOOD MALIK and another---Applicants

VERSUS

The STATE and 3 others---Respondents

Law: Governor-Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 22A,154,561A

Law: Gas (Theft Control and Recovery) Act, (XI of 2016)

Section: 23

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-------Ss. 22-A, 154 & 561-A---Gas (Theft Control and Recovery) Act (XI of 2016), S. 23---Inherent powers of High Court under S.561-A, Cr.P.C.---Scope--Powers of Ex-officio Justice of Peace---Order passed by Ex-officio Justice of Peace for the registration of FIR after recording the statement of complainant--Petitioners assailed order passed by Ex-officio Justice of Peace and sought quashing of the same---It was evident that the applicants, being officials of Gas Utility Company ('SSGC'), conducted a raid at the residence of Respondent No.4.---Such act aggrieved Respondent No.4, prompting him to seek legal recourse, initially by approaching the concerned SHO and subsequently by filing an application before the Ex-Officio Justice of Peace---Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, though called reports from the applicants, but apparently it seemed that the assertions made therein were overlooked---In Para No.3 of the parawise reply/comments, it was asserted that raid was conducted on 18-12-2024 by SSGC officials along with lady searcher in pursuance of S.23 of Gas (Theft Control and Recovery) Act, 2016, through raid letter duly received at police station---However, it was incumbent upon the Justice of Peace to have a look, whether the information so supplied by the Respondent No.4 constituted a cognizable offence or otherwise, which had been ignored, for the obvious reason that allegation leveled in the application was to the extent that the applicants being SSGC officials transgressing their authorities conducted raid at the house of Respondent No.4---Plea taken by the applicants was that their act was strictly in accordance with the law, after seeking due permission from the higher authorities of the SSGC---Besides, their act was covered under S.23 of Gas (Theft Control and Recovery) Act, 2016---Applicants being SSGC officials are/were authorized to search the premises not only in the case of theft, but suspected theft too---Sufficient material was placed in that respect by the applicants including letter dated 21-11-2024 to AGM Regional Office SSGC, seeking permission for conducting raid at the pointed place---Besides, the SHO in…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register