Muhammad Kamran vs Jop etc.

Stereo. HC JD A 38

JUDGMENT SHEET

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT

MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

Writ Petition No.6909 of 2026

Muhammad Kamran. VS Ex-officio Justice of Peace/ Additional Sessions Judge, Multan and seven others.

JUDGMENT

Date of hearing 16.06.2026.

Petitioner Mr. Mumtaz Hassan Khan and Mr. Jafar Khan, represented by: Advocates.

Respondents No. Ms. Nida Ashraf Bakhshi, Prosecutor, PERA. 5 to 8 represented by:

State by: Mr. Sanam Farid Khan Balouch, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab with Shehzad, ASI.

SADIQ MAHMUD KHURRAM, J.- Through this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 the following prayer has been made:-

“Under these circumstances, it is most respectfully prayed that this writ petition may very kindly be accepted and the impugned order dated 01.06.2026 passed by the learned respondent No.1 may kindly be set aside and a directdion may kindly be issued to the respondent No.4 to record the statement of the petitioner under section 154 Cr.P.C. and register the

W.P. No.6909 of 2026

criminal case against the respondents No.5 to 8 and then proceed strictly in accordance with law, in the supreme interest of justice..”

2.Brief facts of the case leading up to the filing of this petition are that the petitioner Muhammad Kamran submitted an application to the SHO, Police Station Mumtaz Abad, District Multan, informing him about the commission of cognizable offences by the accused mentioned in the said application, however, the SHO concerned did not register a case on the information of the petitioner whereafter, the petitioner submitted an applicatioin under sections 22-A/22-B Cr.P.C. to the learned Ex-officio Justice of Peace, Multan complaining of the non-registration of the case, however, vide order dated 01.06.2026, the learned Ex-officio Justice of Peace also dismissed the application of the petitioner, hence, the petition.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner inter- alia contended that the order passed by learned Ex- officio Justice of Peace, dated 01.06.2026 was liable to be set-aside being against the facts and law; that the application as submitted by the petitioner to the S.H.O Police Station Mumtaz Abad, District Multan, did reveal information regarding the commission of cognizable offences, however, on the complaint of the petitioner regarding the non-registration of the F.I.R,

W.P. No.6909 of 2026

the learned Ex-officio Justice of Peace did not pass an appropriate order.

4.The learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab assisted by learned Prosecutor, PERA, has submitted that the Punjab Enforcement and Regulation Act, 2024 (XI of 2024), itself provides a complete mechanism for dealing with the complaints regarding commission of crimes even by the members of the Punjab Enforcement and Regularatory Authority and because of the provisions of the Punjab Enforcement and Regulation Act, 2024 (XI of 2024), no order for the registration of an FIR under section 154 Cr.P.C. could have been validly passed by the learned Ex-officio Justice of Peace.

5.I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Prosecutor PERA, the learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab and perused the documents appended with this petition as well as the impugned order passed by the learned Ex Officio Justice of Peace.

6.The perusal of the record reveals that the petitioner Muhammad Kamran submitted an application to the SHO, Police Station Mumtaz Abad, District Multan, informing him about the commission of cognizable offences by the accused mentioned in the said application, however, the SHO concerned did not

W.P. No.6909 of 2026

register a case on the information of the petitioner whereafter, the petitioner submitted an applicatioin under sections 22-A/22-B Cr.P.C. to the learned Ex- officio Justice of Peace, Multan complaining of the non-registration of the case, however, vide order dated 01.06.2026, the learned Ex-officio Justice of Peace also dismissed the application of the petitioner. It is admitted by the petitioner that his grievances were with regard to the officers of the Punjab Enforcement and Regulatory Authority and therefore, the information relating to the incident being reported by the petitioner fell within the offences as made punishable under Chapter XI of the Punjab Enforcement and Regulation Act, 2024 (XI of 2024). Certain actions have been identified as offences in sections 24 to 47 of the Punjab Enforcement and Regulation Act, 2024 (XI of 2024) and for the investigation and trial of the said offences, a complete procedure has also been provided in the Punjab Enforcement and Regulation Act, 2024 (XI of 2024) itself. In this respect, the relevant provisions are the provisions of section 16, 49 and 53 of the Punjab Enforcement and Regulation Act, 2024 (XI of 2024) which provide for not only getting a case registered against the deliquents but also to file a complaint as well as a representation against the delinquent officials of the Punjab Enforcement and Regularatory Authority

W.P. No.6909 of 2026

by an aggrieved person, who is aggrieved by the actions of the enforcement officers as taken by them.It has been provided under section 16 of the Punjab Enforcement and Regulation Act, 2024 (XI of 2024) that a person aggrieved may file a representation before the Hearing Officer concerned within thirty days of the accruing of the cause of the action. It has been further provided under section 49 of the Punjab Enforcement and Regulation Act, 2024 (XI of 2024) that the Sub Divisional Enforcement Officer may also register an FIR on the complaint or report of the enforcement officer and register an FIR directly if the circumstances are so glaring and the circumstances given in the said act are evident. Addedly, it has been provided under section 53 of the Punjab Enforcement and Regulation Act, 2024 (XI of 2024) that if any person is still aggrieved by any misuse of authority by any officer or employee of Punjab Enforcement and Regularatory Authority, then, the person aggrieved shall have a remedy in addition to all other remedies mentioned above, to file a complaint against such officer or employee before the Grievance Redressal Commissioner (GRC). In this manner, when not only the provisions of registration of an FIR but also the provisions of filing of representation as well as complaint before the Grievance Redressal

W.P. No.6909 of 2026

Commissioner (GRC) have been provided under the Punjab Enforcement and Regulation Act, 2024 (XI of 2024) itself for redressal of the grievances of the aggrieved person as well as for the offences committed by any officer of the Punjab Enforcement and Regularatory Authority, then, the provisions related to the registration of FIR under section 154 Cr.P.C. would become not available in cases related to the offences committed under the Punjab Enforcement and Regulation Act, 2024 (XI of 2024), which is a special Act dealing with particular offences as made punishable in the said Act. In this manner, the order passed by the learned Ex-officio Justice of Peace whereby he refused to issue a direction to the SHO, Police Station Mumtaz Abad, District Multan to register an FIR on the information of the petitioner cannot be said to be violative of the law or being illegal in any manner. At the same time, the petitioner also has a remedy available to him under the provisions of the Punjab Enforcement and Regulation Act, 2024 (XI of 2024) under sections 16, 49 and 53 of the said Act to not only get a case registered against the deliquents but also to file a complaint as well as a representation against the delinquent officials of the Punjab Enforcement and Regularatory Authority.

W.P. No.6909 of 2026

7.In view of the above discussion, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to avail the remedies available to him under the Punjab Enforcement and Regulation Act, 2024 (XI of 2024) for the redressal of his grievances and for providing information regarding the commission of crimes by the members of the Punjab Enforcement and Regulatory Authority.

(SADIQ MAHMUD KHURRAM)

JUDGE

Munir

APPROVED FOR REPORTING

JUDGE