Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

JAGDEV ALIAS JAGGA versus INSPECTOR POLICE, CHUHARKANA


Police Rules 1934 R 25 2 Interim Constitution Order (1 of 1981), Article 9 Constitutional Jurisdictions Police allegedly impeached and forced them to disclose the whereabouts of a fugitive accused in a police case. The third wife of two applicants blinded and one of the applicants, and thus unable to provide any assistance to the police to arrest the police officer, directed the police officer to proceed strictly in accordance with the law. And do not force or harass applicants who cannot provide any assistance.

1985 P Cr. L J 1471

[Lahore]

Before Manzoor Hussain Sial, J

JAGDEV alias JAGGA and others‑‑Petitioners versus

INSPECTOR POLICE, CHUHARKANA and others‑‑Respondents

Writ Petition No. 4088 of 1980, decided on 27th April, 1984.

Police Rules, 1834‑‑

‑‑‑R. 25.2‑‑Provisional Constitution Order (1 of 1981), Art. 9‑‑Constitutional jurisdiction‑‑Petitioner allegedly tortured humiliated and forced by Police to disclose whereabouts of an absconder accused in a case registered with Police who was related to petitioners‑‑Two petitioners blind persons and third wife of one of petitioners and as such unable to render any assistance to Police for capturing accused‑‑Police Officer directed to proceed strictly in accordance with law and not to coerce or harass petitioners who could render no assistance.

Haji Dilshad Islam v. Punjab Province P L D 1975 Lah 521, 523 ref.

Hassan Ahmed Khan Kanwar for Petitioners.

ORDER

Learned counsel submits that the petitioners have no connection whatsoever with Manzoor, who is accused in a case registered vide F.I.R. No. 39, dated 31st March, 1980, at Police Station Chuharkana, District Sheikhupura. He submits that merely because the above mentioned accused was related to the petitioners, the latter were summoned by the Police Officer, tortured, humiliated and forced to disclose the whereabouts of the accused, who is said to be absconder. It is submitted that petitioners 1 and 2 are blind persons and petitioner No.3 is the wife of petitioner No. 2. He states that even otherwise, they are unable to render any assistance to the police for capturing the aforementioned accused. It is contended that the respondents are not proceedings in accordance with the procedure laid down in para. 25.2 of the Police Rules, 1934. Reliance in this connection is also #, placed on Haji Dilshad Islam v. Punjab Province P L D 1975 Lah. 521, 523.

2. The respondents are directed to proceed strictly in accordance with law and not to coerce or harass the petitioners who apparently cannot assist them in capturing the accused.

3. With the above observation, this petition stands disposed of.

M. Y. H. Observation accordingly.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
list of supreme court advocates from Bhirya Road lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.