Find a Lawyer

MIAN SHAFIQUE AHMED versus SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PESHAWAR

Section 154 Crimes against Property (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), Section 17 (3) Conduct of Conduct (XLV of 1860), Section 337 F (ii) / 182/186 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional Application The applicant / complainant of the registered criminal case alleged that with the help of the local police, with the help of the court bailiff, the accused / respondents tried to seize his petrol pump and upon signing the applicant's arrest warrant. Was forced. Seizure warrant, an accused hit him on the head in the presence of Section HO and the applicant, who sustained serious injury, was knocked unconscious and the accused snatched his bag containing huge amount of money, the applicant alleged. It was reported that the police did not file a case against the suspects. The petitioner made every effort in his constitutional request to direct the concerned police to file a case against the accused / respondents. y Section 154, CRPC made it mandatory for a police station to charge that if a police officer in charge of a police station is given any information orally related to the commission of a payable offense, then by them or their Is reduced to writing on the instruction of. The Superior Courts also repeatedly interpreted that the provisions of the law were stated in very clear terms and that there was no excuse for the Station House Officer in this regard, when, through an allegation, he was made competent. The identity offense was reported to be committed. In the present case, the petitioner had constituted a commission of admissible offense against the defendants which should be investigated by an agency. Respondents list of advocates from Bannu lawyer