Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 90 of 1981, decided on 18th May, 1982.

‑‑ ‑ S. 561‑A and Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 188, 193 & 211--‑Per jury‑Petitioner challaned under S. 188, Penal Code for alleged violation of injunction granted by High Court when in fact no injunction granted High Court not approving that police made false case and supervising officers failed in duty to see that false case being sent up to Court Proceedings quashed in circumstances of case‑Show‑cause notice issued to complainant and Police for prosecution for commission of offence under Ss. 193 & 211, Penal Code.

Muhammad Yunus Arvi for Applicant.

Respondent in person.

Additional Advocate‑General for the State.

Date of institution: 27th May, 1981.

This is an application by Khadim Hussain presumably under sec tion 561‑A, Cr. P. C. for quashment of proceedings against him under section 188, P. C. pending in the Court of Sub‑Divisional Magistrate Mirpur in pursuance of the first information report No. 241 of 1980 dated 17‑10‑1980 which is exhibited as 'C D'.

It was alleged in the challan i.e. the police report against the applicant accused that he had violated an order of the High Court dated 25‑6‑1979 whereby he was prohibited and restrained from entering into a Plot No. 364 situate in Ban‑khurma or raising any construction thereon.

After registration of the case under section 188, P. C. for contravention of an order so called of the High Court usual investigation was made by the police resulting in a police report to be presented in the Court for trial of the accused‑applicant under section 188, P. C. vide report. Exh. 'C D'. It was even on the so‑called satisfaction of the supervising officers of the police that the case was sent up to the Court. How poor the satisfaction, so‑called; it was destitute of any foundation.

The applicant's allegations are that there was no injunction issued by the High Court, the disobedience of which was wrongly attributed to him. The maker of the report had nothing to do with the matter in issue between the applicant and one Muhammad Zaman. He (maker of the report) was least concerned with the litigation which was going on between the applicant and Muhammad Zaman in the Court of Sub‑Judge in respect of plot viz. No. 364 where the temporary injunction though was once issued by the Sub‑Judge; yet it was vacated afterwards.

Thus there was no injunction of any Court in existence, the contravention of which could be complained against him and that the police was used by a rival party in order to harass him by bringing a false case against him on basis of an imaginary order of injunction issued by the High Court, before the Court of Sub‑Divisional Magistrate. By fabrication of false evidence the case was taken to the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate which case is factually frivolous, vexatious and oppressive. He was even arrested by the police with the result that he bad to be enlarged on bail by a Magistrate.

On perusal of the record and examination of the witnesses whose state ments were never recorded by the police under section 161‑A, Cr. P. C., but were cited as witnesses of the prosecution, it was found that a false case was prepared in totality against the applicant, by the police officials and the maker of the report, who have grossly conducted abuse of the process of the Court. No injunction was issued by the High Court, the disobedience of which could have become an offence against the applicant. Even there were no proceedings ever coming before the High Court in respect of the plot in question. Not only this that a false challan was put in before the Court but another fabrication was practised in obtaining a complaint in a spurious support of the challan questioned from a Revenue Magistrate not concerned with the matter in issue contained falsely is the so‑called chailan that a prohibitive order was made under section 145, Cr. P. C. prohibiting the applicant from entering on the plot in question which was defied by the accused‑applicant and this was attached with the police report to show spuriously that the complaint under section 188, Cr. P. C. was legally made in view of section 195(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code. A criminal Court has no jurisdiction to entertain a challan unless supported by a complaint of the authority concerned whose order was disobeyed as warranted by section 195(1)(a), Cr. P. C.

The police to achieve its ulterior design against the applicant filed the challan before the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate who is a Revenue Officer and invested with powers of a Magistrate. Some of the Revenue Officers wielding criminal powers are usually understood to be led by the police and not by the administration of justice, as is evident from the instant challan attached with the complaint fabricated, which could be managed and manipulated by the police. The police does not appear to have left the old traditional practice of concocting false cases even during the present days when, they say, that Nation is free from a yoke or bondage of slavery and all are citizens of an independent country and the members of Islamic Society. How sad it is; that a false case was made by the police officials whose supervising Officers have even failed in their duty to se with the result that a false case was sent to the Court for trial and thus an innocent man was involved in a false case thereby causing trouble and mental torture etc. to him.

That being so, the proceedings taken by the Sub-Divisional Magistrat in the case in question are hereby quashed and the challan and complain taken together are dismissed for being totally false. Show‑cause notices shall issue to Asgbar Ali, the maker of the report and the Police Officers namely Kh. Muhammad Abdullah; A. S, I. and Abdur Razzaq Khan, Sub‑Inspector who were found to have concocted a false case against the applicant by fabrication of false evidence to explain as to why they should not be prosecuted for the commission of offences under sections 193 and 211, Penal Code.

Proceedings quashed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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