Legal Principle & Question Decided

Ruling Summary: This decision was rendered by the Sindh High Court, officially reported as 2024 SHC 2096. In this matter between Criminal Miscelleneous 735/2024 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi - ABDUL GHAFFAR MANDHAI (Applicant) and the Respondent, the court adjudicated key questions of statutory construction, procedural regularity, and legal precedent under Pakistani law.

Core Holding: The honorable bench evaluated governing statutory provisions and judicial authorities to establish the rights of the parties, delivering the binding reasoning set out below.

Full Judgment Text & Judicial Ruling

COURT: Sindh High Court CASE NO: Criminal Miscelleneous 735/2024 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi CITATION: 2025 SHC KHI 2096 PARTIES: ABDUL GHAFFAR MANDHAI (Applicant) ORDER DATE: 25-AUG-25 BENCH: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jawad Akbar Sarwana(Author) A.F.R: Yes ------------------------------------------------------------ IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI Criminal Misc. Application No. 735 of 2024

Applicant : Abdul Ghaffar Mandhai through Mr. S. M. Nehal Hashmi, Advocate

Versus

Respondent No.1 : Zohabi Magsi, Mr. Shahrukh Khan, Advocate

Respondent No.2 : The State Through Ms. Amna Ansari, Additional Prosecutor General (Sindh)

Date of Hearing : 22.08.2025

Date of Decision : 25.08.2025

O R D E R

Jawad Akbar Sarwana , J. : Two years ago, on 25.06.2024, the Applicant-Complainant, Abdul Ghaffar Mandhai, in the capacity of a participant bidder, was in attendance at a procurement -related meeting of the Complaint Redressal Committee (“CRC”) of the D.G. Park Baldia Uzma Frere Hall, Karachi, held in the Conference Room of the Parks and Horticulture Department KMC. He claims that the Respondent No.1, Zohaib Magsi, who was an officer of the D.G. Park Baldia Uzma Frere Hall, Karachi, was also present in the conference room, but, according to him, he had no business to be in there, proceeded to “use[d] abusive language and issued threats of murder and dire consequences to the Applicant.” Counsel for Respondent No.1 claims that Zohaib Magsi was the Secretary of the Procurement Committee and was therefore present in the room in such capacity. He argues that the complaint filed by the Applicant- Complainant is/was malafide and an alleged attempt to undermine the procurement and have it declared “misprocurement.” He denies the averments raised by opposing Counsel . He submits that t his complaint is in aid of the civil action initiated by the applicant against the D.G. Park Baldia Uzma Frere Hall, Karachi, concerning the said

Crl. Jail Appeal No.D-19 of 2020 -2-

Page 2 of 2

procurement, and that the applicant intends to use the criminal proceedings to support his civil action . In rebuttal, Counsel for the Applicant, during arguments, shared the Minutes of the Meeting of the Complaint Redressal Committee on 25.06.2024, which does not list the name of Respondent No.1 as one of the members of the Committee. Counsel further contends that the Respondent No.1, acting in concert with some of his colleagues also present in the room, is guilty of cognizable offences, which is an entirely separate matter from the civil action filed by him against the D.G. Parks Baldia Uzma Frere Hall Karachi , and even otherwise, the proposed accused are not impleaded as parties in the said action. Therefore the Cr. Misc. appln. filed by him was maintainable and he is aggrieved by the impugned Order dated 25.06.2024 passed by t he Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, wherein it is observed that the Applicant- Complainant failed to make out a case for direction to the SHO to register the FIR, and dismissed the application.

Heard Counsel, perused the documents available as well as seen and returned the documents shown to me by Counsel during arguments. I do not find any defect in the impugned Order dated 25.06.2024. Neither the compliance report submitted by the Police nor any document available in this file by the Applicant provides information to make out a cognizable offence from the events of 25.06.2024, and given the facts and circumstances of this case, as articulated herein above, I find no reason not to accept the conclusion reached by the Ex -Officio Justice of Peace. The impugned Order is hereby maintained, and, this Cr. Misc. Application is dismissed.

J U D G E

Related Legal Research & Directories

• Browse all judgments from Sindh High Court
• Search Pakistani statutes: Constitution of Pakistan 1973, PPC, CrPC, CPC & Family Laws
• Analyze this case with Al Wakeelo AI Legal Assistant