Find a Lawyer

Writ Petition No. 5302 of 1981, decided on 16th April, 1982.

Art. 9‑Writ jurisdiction ‑-- Case, cancellation of --‑ Question whether final order had been passed by S. S. P or whether D. S. P. had recommended for cancellation of case and how investiga tion re‑initiated in context of direction given by High Court in earlier writ petition filed by petitioner, held, could best be examined by S. S. P.‑--Petitioners challenging cancellation of case could approach S. S. P. for redress of their grievance if so advised.

T. H. Rizvi for Petitioners,

Shaukat Ali Mehr for Waseem Sajjad for Respondents.

Date of hearing : 16th April, 1982.

The constitutional petition seeks quashment of F. I. R. No. 48 of 1980 registered on 17th February, 1980 at Police Station Kamalia, District Faisalabad.

2. The relevant facts in brief giving rise to this petition are that the petitioners had earlier filed Writ Petition No. 4789 of 19250 whereas Muhammad Yusuf respondent No. 2 also filed Writ Petition No. 9249 of 1980 seeking quashment of F. I. R. No. 48/80 and F. I. R. 39/80 registered at Police Station Kamalia at the instance of the aforesaid parties respectively. The writ petition had been disposed of by this Court and portion of the order relevant to the extent is reproduced below :‑

"I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record produced by Police Officer present in Court. The position that emerges from the facts apprised by the parties is that the investiga tion has been conducted by different Police Officers in the above‑mentioned cases. The parties did not repose confidence in the investigating officers and each party tried that the case lodged against the opposite‑party be challaned and that lodged against it he quashed at the investigation stage. It was for that reason that parties invoked constitutional jurisdiction of this Court in the matter.

4. I afraid both these petitions seeking quashment of F. I. Rs. and investigations held in pursuance whereof are misconceived, in the circumstances of the case. There is no reason justifying inter ference in the investigation of these cases in the exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. There was two divergent versions and separate offences allegedly committed by the two sets of accused. The situation warrants investigation into the allegations levelled by one party against the other and sifting of the truth by an impartial Police Officer in order to bring the accused before the Court for trial, I, therefore, dispose of these petitions with the observation that the Superintendent of Police, Faisalabad may depute some senior impartial Police Officer from the Headquarter to investi gate the matter expeditiously and submit the challan, for trial, in Court."

3. In compliance with the aforementioned order it appears that S.S.P. Faisalabad deputed Ch. Muhammad Sadiq, D. S. P. Headquarters for investigation of the case. The D. S. P. investigated the matter and directed submission of challan in the trial Court in the case register vide F. I. R. No. 39 of 1980.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Investigating Officer recommended cancellation of case registered vide F. I. R. No. 48/80 against the petitioners and the S. S. P. verified the investigation and con firmed the same. This fact is however, disputed by the opposite side. Learned counsel submits that after the Investigating Officer had finally recommended cancellation of the case of the opposite side against the petitioners and submitted challan only in respect of the case registered vide F. I. R. No. 39 of 1980 Saghir Shah A. S. I. Police Station Kamalia respondent No. 1, herein at the instance of the opposite side had siarted the investigation in the case registered vide F. I. R. No. 48/80 under sections 15/16 of Hudood Ordinance, 1979 without any, lawful authority.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 2 on the contrary submitted that the investigation in the case registered vide F. I. R. No. 48/80 had not concluded nor there was any final order passed by the S. S. P. in the matter as incorrectly asserted by the peti tioners and there is no violation of the order of this Court dated 16th September 1980 passed in Writ Petition No. 4789 of 1980.

6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties the questions as to whether the final order had been passed by the S. S. P. seeking cancel lation of the case registered vide F. I. R. No. 48 of 1980 or whether the D. S. P. had recommended for cancellation of the case and how the A investigation has been re‑initiated in the context of the direction given by this Court, could best be examined by the S. S. P. Faisalabad and the petitioners if so advised may approach him for the redress of their grievance and the latter shall proceed strictly in accordance with law.

7. The order dated 16th September, 1980 passed by this Court and referred to above requires no further clarification. This petition is dis missed subject to the observation made above. Civil Miscellaneous Nos. 3 and 4 of 1982 also stand disposed of.

Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.