Find a Lawyer

Writ Petition No. 3353 of 1984, decided on 2nd August, 1984.

‑‑‑Art. 9‑‑Registration of criminal case‑‑Allegation of snatching Rs.2,000 from petitioners not mentioned in original complaints while remaining allegation of manhandling by Police Officers, disclosing commission of a non‑cognizable offence only, remedy for which is a complaint before a Criminal Court‑‑Petitioners may avail such remedy, if so advised‑‑Petition dismissed, in circumstances.‑‑[Complaint].

Dr. Farooq A. Chaudhry for Petitioners.

The petitioners seek registration of a case against certain police officials for manhandling and causing injuries to petitioner No.1. The medical report attached with the petition shows that the injuries suffered by the petitioner are all simple. The offence, if any, will therefore, not be a cognizable offence and the police cannot investigate the case. The learned counsel, however, submits that an amount of Rs.2,000 was snatched from the petitioner at the time of occurrence. The D.S.P. City is present with the record. He is inquiring into certain applications made against the S.H.O. Lohari Gate and Muhammad Ashiq A.S.I., Lohari Gate relating to the injuries caused to Muhammad Wahid petitioner. One of the applications has been signed by Nawaz Ahmad Chughtai a brother‑in‑law of the petitioner whose signatures have been identified by the petitioner No. 1 in Court. Another application has been given by the Traders' Association. Neither of the two petitions make any mention of money being snatched. This allegation appears to be an afterthought. The remaining allegations show the commission of a non‑cognizable offence if any, for which complaint before a criminal A Court is the only remedy available to the petitioners. They may avail of such a remedy, if they are so advised. With these observations the writ petition is dismissed.

S.G.D Writ refused

Find a Lawyer Near You

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