Mumtaz Ahmed S/O Jan Muhammad vs Allah Dad And Others

Balochistan High Court · 2024 · Before Hon'ble Justice Iqbal Ahmed Kasi

The instant appeal under Section 417 (2- A) Cr.P .C. has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 30.11.2023 (“the impugned order”) passed by the Judicial Magistrate-I, Khuzdar (“the trial Court”), whereby, the application under Section 249-A, Cr.P .C.filed by the respondents No.1 to 3, viz. Allah Dad son of Sahi Dad, Muhammad Rafique son of Ali Muhammad and Ali Akbar son of Wali Muhammad, was allowed and they were acquitted of the charge.

2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that a crime, vide FIR No.31 of 2023, was lodged by the complainant Mumtaz Ahmed/ appellant with Police Station, City, Khuzdar, under Sections 365, 147, 148, 149 PPC, dated 26.12.2022, with the averments that on 10.11.2022, at about 10:00 p.m. the accused persons in furtherance of their common intention duly armed with weapons went to complainant relative’s house and forcibly on gun point abducted his wife Mst. Saira. Consequently, the FIR was lodged.

3. After usual investigation challan of the case was submitted before the trial Court, and the trial was commenced. Criminal Acquittal Appeal No. 160 of 2024 2 Only for viewing purpose. Contact office for certified copy.

4. The formal charge was framed and read over to the respondents No.1 to 3/accused persons, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

5. In order to prove the accusation, the prosecution produced three witnesses as PW-1, PW-2 and PW-3 and the trial was in progress, meanwhile the respondents No.1 to 3/accused persons through their counsel moved an application under Section 249-A, for their premature acquittal before the trial Court, who vide impugned order, allowed the application and acquitted the respondents No.1 to 3/accused persons of the charge, hence this appeal.

6. It may not be out of place to mention here that on 22.10.2024, learned counsel for the appellant called absent and same was the position on 04.06.2024, 25.07.2024 and 16.09.2024, and it was observed that the appellant and his counsel have lost their interest in the instant matter, therefore, the case was reserved for writing of the judgment on the basis of available record.

7. We have gone through the record and perusal of the same reveals that the FIR was lodged after delay of about 21 days, that too, without any plausible explanation. The main object of prompt registration of an FIR is to rule out the possibility of deliberation, consultation and inquiry. The element of delay in lodging the crime report is treated with caution because there is a tendency to involve innocent people during the interval, thus non-registration of FIR promptly has damaged the very foundation of case. Criminal Acquittal Appeal No. 160 of 2024 3 Only for viewing purpose. Contact office for certified copy.

8. Furthermore, the record reveals that there is no eyewitness of the alleged incident except the complainant, as prosecution did not mention any person as eyewitness, who had witnesses the alleged occurrence of abduction by the respondents No.1 to 3/accused persons.

Opening of the judgment. Loading the full judgment on LexPK…