Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 436, 439, 200

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 220, 343, 500, 109

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) Ss. 436 & 439-Revision-Discharge of accused-Prosecution witness stating applicant/complainant to have been arrested or confined by a police officer-Other prosecution witnesses stating accused to have been with such police officer-Place of arrest a shrine with many other persons assembled-Conclusion not possible of complainant having been arrested at instance of accused-No evidence whatsoever of instigation or conspiracy-Complainant arrested being involved in illegal transportation of Pakistani nationals out of Pakistan-Evidence, held, not sufficient for issuance of process and accused rightly discharged-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 220/ 343/500 and 109. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) S. 202-Preliminary inquiry-Evidence-Magistrate in inquiry under S. 202-Cannot overlook broad features in evidence rendering same doubtful or unbelievable-Magistrate, held. acted correctly in discus sing evidence of witnesses-Contention that at stage of preliminary inquiry Magistrate could not embark upon appreciation of evidence or consider question of interestedness of witnesses-Held, not acceptable. Date of hearing : 13th September 1973.                                                                                                                                        JUDGMENT This is an application for Revision of an order passed by the Sub. Divisional Magistrate, Shah Bunder, whereby the former had dismissed the complaint filed by the applicant Mohd. Soofan against the respondents Mohd. Amin Qureshi, a retired Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mohd. Anwar Shaikh a Sub-Divisional Magistrate and Khalifa Haji Ghulam Hussain, a Zamindar of Chuhar Jamali. 2. At the relevant time applicant Mohammad Soofan was a Head Constable of Police of Chuhar Jamali Outpost. He filed a complaint in the Court…