Lawyers Directory Listing
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.
Writ Petition No. 1162 of 1984, decided on 1st April, 1986.
‑‑Ss. 154 & 157‑‑Police Act (V of 1861), S.23‑‑Police Rules, 1934, R.25.17‑‑Registration of a cognizable case‑‑Petitioner under colour of office, illegally shot by an Assistant Sub‑Inspector of Police and later falsely involved in a criminal case‑‑Police, held, could not refuse to enter case disclosing commission of a cognizable ‑case, in circumstances‑‑ Registration of a formal case ordered.
M. Anwar, Barrister‑at‑Law v. The Station House Officer, Civil Lines, Lahore P L D 1972 Lah. 493; Haji Muhammad Khan v. Ch. Khizar Hayat etc. P L D 1977 Lah. 424 and State v. Z. A. Bhutt6 etc. P L D 1978 Lah. 523 ref.
Petitioner in person.
Farooq Bedar Asstt. A.‑G. for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 1st April, 1986.
By this Constitutional Petition, Muhammad Zafar petitioner prays for a direction from this Court for registration of a criminal case against the respondent A.S.I. Manzoor Ahmad. His version is that he was shot by him on a wrong pretext, was later falsely involved in a case under section 307/353/224/186, P.P.C. registered at Daska, and was relieved of the same when it was withdrawn as a result of a judicial inquiry held under the orders of the District Magistrate, Sialkot.
2. On 2‑12‑1986, the learned Assistant Advocate‑General sought time to take up the matter with the Inspector‑General of Police. Today, he has stated that only a show‑cause notice has been issued to the respondent‑A.S.‑I. by the Superintendent of Police, Gujrat and that they feel that there was no need to register a case at the instance of the petitioner.
3. As noted above, the judicial inquiry supports the allegations against the A.S.I. The provisions of sections 154 and 157 make it incumbent upon officer‑in‑charge of a Police Station to record the first information report on receipt of such information as discloses the commission of a cognizable offence. The same is the purport of section 23 of the Police Act, 1861 read with paragraph 25.17 of the Police Rules, 1934. The information given in the case in hand clearly related to the commission of a cognizable offence and indeed such was the finding of the Magistrate holding judicial inquiry. The Police could not refuse to enter it in the register prescribed for the purpose. The precedent cases of M. Anwar Barristar‑al‑Law v. The Station House Officer, Civil Lines Lahore P L D 1972 Lah. 493; Haji Muhammad Khan v. Ch. Khizar Hayat etc. P L D 1977 Lah. 424 and (3) State v. Z.A. Bhutto etc. P L D 1978 Lah. 523 lend support to the petitioner's contention.
4. In reply, learned counsel for the A.S.I. vainly urged that he shot the fire in discharge of his duty and was protected. The judicial inquiry provides an elaborate answer to it. He was found by the learned Magistrate to have illegally shot the petitioner and later falsely involved him in the criminal case.
5. As a result, I accept the Writ Petition and direct the Superintendent of Police, Sialkot, to register a criminal case against Manzoor Ahmad, A.S.I. as per report of the petitioner.
S.A. ‑‑‑‑‑ Petition accepted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer