IMTIAZ AHMED CHEEMA versus S.H.O., POLICE STATION DHARKI, GHOTKI 2
Section 22A and 561A Caching of Order The applicant's complaint for section HA, which was section HA, was that he withheld the accused and recovered 120 grams of cocaine from him and the accused was cheated. Then, without verifying the facts, at the request of the brother of the accused Justice of Peace directed the police station concerned to record the statement of the brother of the accused and if the admissible offense against the applicant was found to be a crime, then the case against the applicant. Be listed. The provisions of Section 22A, CCPC were misused in a number of cases The legislature did not intend that any person who prosecuted the accused for the payment of duties should be mechanically deprived of Section 22A, CRPC will be harassed by seeking court provisions. Application should not be allowed under Section 22A, CR PC. But he should have made up his mind whether the applicant had approached the court with open hands or was corruptly corrupted unless such practice was discouraged, and it would have far-reaching effects on public officials. Will have to take action against them in the payment of duties. It should be interpreted in such a way that it protects everyone, and in the present justice, the Justice of Peace Commission was approved in a mechanical manner, and the complainant's approach to Justice of Peace would reflect this. If it is tainted with adultery, it will be open to the complainant. Failure to file a complaint directly against the applicant if any such directive has been canceled in the circumstances.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2010
