The legislators augmented the provision of section (22-A), in Criminal Procedure Code in order to provide the alternate platform to the man in the street against the highhandedness of police officials. The powers vested with the Justice of Peace aims to cross check the act of the station house officer whether he has acted legally or illegally under section 154, of criminal procedure code. The situation further aggravated when it becomes the establish practice of every Tom, Dick, and Harry to seek remedy under the shadow of the office of justice of peace. The mechanism outlined in the police order 2002, for the redressal of grievances has been failed. Without putting into operation the departmental hierarchy of police, the powers of Justice of Peace pushed the layman on the horns of a dilemma. The Supreme Court has broken the ice and advanced the line of action in order to address the procedure for the registration of complaints and investigations within the parameters of police order 2002 and ultimately cut this gordian knot. The present study was focus on the analysis of adverse effects of the powers of Justice of Peace on the criminal justice system by explaining the puzzling fact that why Bar councils boycott the turning initiative decided by the Pakistani supreme court in the form of precedent. The nature of administrative power possesses by two offices simultaneously and its adverse effects on the functioning of the criminal justice system. The parliament should play its pivotal role to embrace the proposed reforms from judiciary and national judicial institutions with the high head. A dedicated political will is required to bring new major reforms in order to meet emerging challenges in the criminal justice system instead of to left the room empty for judicature to weather the storm. Some recommendations after analyzing its long-lasting effects on the criminal justice system are also proposed.