HYDERABAD, April 24: Sindh High Court, Hyderabad circuit bench, here on Thursday upheld the order of judicial magistrate, issuing non-bailable warrants against four police officers including SP investigation, taluka investigation officer (TIO) Badin, in-charge investigation police station Tando Bago and an ASI of Tando Bago police station.

The order which was authored by Justice Munib Ahmed Khan was earlier reserved by the court. It was passed on a constitutional petition filed by Ishrat Lohar advocate on behalf of SP investigation Anwar Ali Mari, TIO Ali Raza Leghari, Amanat Cheema, in-charge investigation team and ASI Mohammad Bux Detho, praying the court to set-aside order of judicial magistrate Badin whereby non-bailable warrants were issued against them.

Petitioners’ case was that additional district judge Badin-I ordered registration of FIR against them on an application filed by Khalid Halepoto on November 10,2006 without issuing notices to them. They said they challenged the order directing registration of FIR before High Court and, after hearing the parties, the court observed that no adverse action would be taken against them on the basis of FIR unless material is collected in investigation.

Then district nazim sought transfer of investigation from Badin and a committee was formed by DIG operations Hyderabad for crime No 8/07 u/s 156-A, C, D of Police Order 2002 read with section 343 PPC. Their counsel said that as per directive of Regional Police Officer (RPO), investigation team probed the case and disposed of the matter under B-class (cancel class) and forwarded summary to the DIG. The final report was submitted before the judicial magistrate Tando Bago, who disagreed with findings of investigation team and referred it to sessions judge Badin as alleged offence is to be tried by sessions court.

Complainant of FIR had reported high-handedness of police and wrongful confinement of his family members for five days in October 2006 and demanded Rs200,000 for their release. He got them released through District Nazim Badin who raided lock-up of Tando Bago police station on October 30.

Petitioner’s counsel said that after detailed inquiry police submitted challan which could have been accepted by magistrate, but instead of giving his findings, he started trial by recording evidence of the accused and witnesses and, thereafter, issued NBWs for wanted persons. He termed magistrate’s action illegal.

The counsel said magistrate issued NBWs though he had no power to issue NBWs when cognisance was taken by sessions court. He said, the magistrate didn’t apply judicial mind while passing such order in haste although no material was available to connect petitioners with the crime, therefore, the order dated May 8,2007 should be set aside. He prayed the court to set aside the NBWs.

Assistant AG Sindh supported magistrate’s order saying after proper inquiry to which he is empowered has taken cognisance of the case. He said that magistrate has powers under section 190 Cr.PC to give his thoughts to police report and should not accept the same with closed eyes.

The court observed that order shows that magistrate has applied his mind and keeping in view the past history took action. He said that it was pertinent to mention here that FIR was registered after intervention of sessions judge but police officials were involved therefore no proceeding could be taken and even that was taken half heartedly with finding that they termed the case as false B-class.

The court said magistrate’s finding and material show that grievance of complainant is to be scrutinised in a judicial way and police should not be permitted to take matter in their hands. He said that magistrate could examine material and even could call question from witnesses to verify contents of material before him.

It observed that magistrate while taking cognisance has to record some statements and to scrutinise the allegation which is permitted keeping in view the gist and requirement of section 190 Cr.PC, otherwise the very purpose of magistrate to have a check on police report would fail. In such a situation there is no force in petitioners’ counsel’s objection thus the petition stands dismissed.