Muhammad Essa V. Mudasir Ahmed and others,

2020 M L D 1969 [Balochistan] Before Muhammad Kamran Khan Mulakhailand Nazeer Ahmed Langove, JJ MUHAMMAD ESSA ---Petitioner Versus MUDASIR AHMED and 3 others ---Respondents Constitutional Petition No.746 of 2019, decided on 16th December, 2019. Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) --- ----S.22 -A (6)(1) ---Ex-Officio Justice of Peace ---Direction to register case --- Effect --- Petitioner was aggrieved of direction issued to Station House Officer by Ex -Officio Justice of Peace to register case against petitioner ---Validity ---Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, instead of issuing direction for recording version of complainant, directed Station House Officer for registration of FIR ---Ex-Officio Justice of Peace committed error while issuing such direction as the same was not according to the guideline provided by Supreme Court ---High Court directed investigating authority to record version of complainant and order passed by Ex-Officio Justice of Peace was set aside ---Petition was allowed, in circumstances. Sugh ran Bibi's case PLD 2018 SC 595 rel. Muhammad Shabir Rajput for Petitioner. Sarwar Khan Kakar for Respondent No.1. Sudheer Ahmed Baloch, DPG along with Ghulam Muhammad, S.H.O./Incharge Levies Thana, Hanna for the State. Date of hearing: 16th December, 2019. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD KAMRAN KHAN MULAKHAIL, J .---The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, and sought the following relief: "It is therefore, respectfull y prayed that the order impugned having been rendered in militancy with the Law pronounced by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in Mst.Sughran Bibi case (PLD 2018 SC 595) (sic) may kindly be set aside in the interest of justice and law."

2. The petitio ner through the instant petition, has called in question the order dated 25'h July, 2019, passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge -I, Quetta, being designated ex - Officio Justice of the Peace, wherein the application filed by the respondent No.1 (Mu dasir Ahmed) under Section 22 -A(6)(1) Cr.P.C, was accepted and the respondent No.2 was directed to register the FIR. The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this court, in the light of judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in Su ghran Bibi's case (PLD 2018 SC 595), on a strength that no FIR of counter version could be registered, but the learned ex -Officio Justice of the Peace, without observing this aspect, passed the impugned order. Hence, this petition.

3. Heard, record perused .

4. Perusal of the case file reveals that the petitioner registered an FIR No. 08 of 2019 under Section 337 -ADF, 427, 34 P.P.C. with Levies Thana, Hanna, Quetta on 01.07.2019, against Bashir Ahmed, Ghulam Nabi, Naseebullah and Aminullah, with the averment s that the above named persons attacked upon him and his brother and caused them multiple injuries on their person and, while his vehicle bearing registration No. ACK -923 was also damaged. On 04.07.2019, the respondent No.1 also approached the Tehsildar Le vies Thana, Hanna by filing an application for lodging the FIR in respect of the same incident and on failure, approached the ex -Officio Justice of Peace, wherein his application was accepted vide order dated 25th July 2019, directing the respondent No.2 f or registration of FIR.

5. Admittedly, both the version of the respective parties are outcome of same incident, in respect of which an FIR 08 of 2019 Levies Thana, Hanna, Quetta has already been registered by the petitioner, thus, the version of the respondent was to be received, recorded and investigated in the same FIR, in view of dictum laid down by the hon'ble apex Court in the Sughran Bibi v. State (PLD 2018 SC 595). The relevant passage whereof is reproduced hereunder: "The confusion prevailing in the matter of registration of multiple FIRs in respect of the same offence stems from a misunderstanding that an FIR is the version of the incident reported to the police whereas the legal position is that an FIR to be registered under section 154, Cr. P.C. is only an information about commission of a cognizable offence and not an information about the circumstances in which such offence was committed or by whom it was committed. If the information supplied to the police not only reports commission of a cognizable offence but also contains a story as to how and by whom the offence was committed then such further information is just a version of the informant and during the investigation the investigating officer is free to entertain any number of versions advanced by any number of persons and it is his duty "to discover the actual facts of the case and to arrest the real offender or offenders. He shall not commit himself prematurely to any view of the facts for or against any person" as mandated by Rule 25 .2(3) of the Police Rules, 1934 reproduced above. All subsequent or divergent versions of the same occurrence or the persons involved therein are to be received, recorded and investigated by the investigating officer in the same "case" which is based upon the one and only FIR registered in respect of the relevant "offence" in the prescribed book kept at the local police station." The learned ex -Officio Justice of the Peace, instead of issuing direction for recording version of the respondent No.1, directed the respondent No.2 for registration of a separate FIR, which was not according to the guideline provided by the hon'ble apex Court, thus, committed an error. For afore -discussed reasons, this petition is accepted and the order dated 25th July 2019 passe d by the learned Justice of Peace/Additional District and Sessions Judge -I, Quetta is hereby set aside, followed by dismissal of the application filed by the respondent No.1. However, the investigating authority is directed to record the version of the res pondent No.l. in case FIR No. 08 of 2019, Levies Thana Hanna, Quetta, investigate the matter impartially and submit a separate challan before the court, within three weeks positively. This detailed order shall constitute the reasoning for our short order of even date. MH/123/Bal. Petition allowed.