Blind Prosecution

BLIND PROSECUTION BLIND PROSECUTION By Muhammad Ahmed Saeed, Deputy Prosecutor General Punjab, Lahore The criminal justice system runs on following four wheels; Police, Prosecution, Courts and Prisons. As the Police, Courts and Prisons are absolutely separate subjects; therefore, this article is restricted to the Prosecution only. The Prosecution is a highly technical and professional job. Although every pillar of the criminal justice system has its own importance but the prosecution has to play an extra ordinary role in administration of criminal justice. This organ has pivotal duties to perform with. The Prosecution's performance directly affects the other organs of administration of justice. General prevailing perception about the Prosecution is that the Prosecution is nothing more than advocacy of the complainant. This myth is absolutely wrong and incorrect. Actually the Prosecution represents the State. The complainant, suspects, accused and witnesses are equal citizens of the State; therefore, as a mother of all citizens the Prosecution is custodian of rights of all stakeholders equally in accordance with law. The foremost misconception which is very much needed to defuse is that the Prosecution has to perform independently in order to save the rights of the complainant as well as the accused. Both are the child of the State and deserve equal treatment in accordance with law. Unfortunately, in a country like Pakistan, false litigation is rampant. It is very well observed by the Supreme of Court of Pakistan in judgment cited as PLD 2018 SC 527 that extension of network and exaggeration of facts is a natural phenomenon in Pakistan. A number of criminal cases have been lodged in order to misuse the law or to convert the civil litigation into criminal one. The Police are used as a political twister by the incumbent ruling parties. Local mafias pressurize the police and witnesses. The investigations are conducted by the unskilled persons and without using forensic tools. In such circumstances, the Prosecutors' duties become more important to safeguard are participants of the criminal case. The Prosecution is not here to blindly defend the complainant's case but it also has to keenly watch the right of accused. In order to strengthen my arguments I would like to draw the attention of reader towards following data Facts are self speaking that 25651 cases have been reported to be cancelled upon police report and thereafter 43551 cases have been acquitted by the courts during the year of 2020. So it clearly means that in 69202 cases either false as per police or as per court. If we suppose that in each case 4 persons have been involved then we can estimate that a total numbers of 2,76,808 persons been entangled in false criminal cases during the year of 2020. Approximately 2,76,808 people have been vexed by the police, prison and courts. Although in this available statistics unregistered cases and acquittal by superior courts are not included. This is a sorrow state of fact that 2,76,808 children of the State have to face the rigors of administration of criminal justice by its own blind system. We have to admit that the Prosecution is a cushion between police and court. Our prime duty is put the responsibility on right person for right offence. Therefore, we are equally responsible for this injustice. Either we can stop or reduce it. If, we forever say, NO TO "BLIND PROSECUTION". Proactive, professional and vigilant prosecution is a key of fair administration of justice. Now most important question is that what powers we have and how we can achieve this goal. Answer is very simple by applying threshold test, full code evidentiary test and public interest test. Presently what we are doing is a role of post office between police and court. Inactive, passive and blind prosecution is creating a huge overburden upon courts. This overburden can be dislodged only with a few vibrant steps mentioned below. In a recent study the conviction rate in Pakistan is 12% only in contrast to Japan 99%. Hence, it means the Pakistani courts are 88% overburdened. The Prosecution can save their time, energy and money. Presently police register a case and prepare its challan report we submit as it is in court. This is called blind prosecution. Although some vibrant prosecutors critically examine the challan report but it is too late to cure. The law bounds the police to submit challan report within 14 days of registration of FIR but in contrast police submit it after lapse of several months. At this stage objections do not serve the purpose. We have strike forward. We have to play proactively. The Prosecution is very much empowered under section 9 of Punjab Criminal Prosecution Service Act, 2006 read with Code of Conduct issued under section 10 of ibid Act to call for any record and issue appropriate directions thereon to police investigation officers. As per website information of the Punjab Police; there are 705 police stations in whole Punjab. Punjab has 8 divisions which are further divided in 36 districts. On the other hand, the Punjab Prosecution Department has 973 prosecutors. As per annual report of the year 2014, there are 598 ADPPs and 271 DDPPs and other prosecutors. For administration purpose Prosecution Department should allocate a specific police station to each ADPP and moreover a DDPP can supervise 2/3 police stations. The first three days after the registration of FIR are very much important and crucial for future fate of the case. These are called the GOLDEN HOURS which make or break the case. As per law the police are duty bound to immediately inform about the registration of FIR to the District Public Prosecutor. Soon after the registration of FIRs the relevant ADPP of that specific police station should call for the record of the registered case and he should apply threshold test then and there. He should not wait for submission of challan or bail stage. The ADPP should make sure the following things:-- Firstly, whether the crime scene has been properly inspected, Secondly whether sufficient evidences collectd from the crime scene and it the properly preserved, Thirdly whether the statements of witnesses are correctly recorded in shape of question answer format as advised in Police Rules 1934, Fourthly, whether an unbiased defense version has been correctly recorded, Fifthly whether MLC, PMR and FSL reports are available and in order, Last but not least whether the sections inserted in FIR are in accordance with the available oral and documentary evidences. Thereafter ADPP should make a formal Threshold Test Report and DDPP should countersign it as token of its verification. The prosecution is an important stakeholder of the administration of justice. If the Police is reluctant to provide appropriate and valid assistance in initial stage; then Prosecution has absolute right to say no to blind prosecution in later stage. This report should be made part and parcel of the case file for further pursuance. This report can be also very helpful to determine the innocence and guilt of the suspects. The investigation officer may be advised to apply for warrant of arrest of such suspect against whom admissible evidence is available. The other proposed accused against whom no admissible evidence is available their arrest may be deferred till finding of admissible evidence. The prosecutor must forward the application of warrant if he finds valid reason to do so. In this way unnecessary burden of bail application may be decreased. Thereafter, the investigation officers should be advised to procure complete investigation report within next 14 days after the submission of threshold test report. The Prosecution Department should make Full Code Evidentiary Test Labs at each district under the supervision of highly experienced, qualified and senior professional prosecutor who have experience of working in High Courts and Supreme Court. Whole case must be present in that lab and these professional prosecutors must put a mock trial with help of available evidences after applying the full code evidence test. After the completion of Full Code Test they must issue a report in writing with reason. Whether prosecution in this case should be conducted or not? Against whom and to what extent prosecution should be conducted? How many challans should be prepared? Whether joint and separate trials are needed? Against whom persons are admissible evidences available? Which persons are liable to be discharged? What kind of charges should be pressed? What kind of charges should be withdrawn? Which accused should be granted pardon and on what conditions? Punjab Prosecution Service has a very well equipped training department. Training department should work at day and night shifts in order to produce qualified prosecutor who are able to correctly apply the Threshold Test, Full Code Test and Public Interest Test. In short we should not wait for police to conclude the case but we should intervene in initial stage in order to save the case. If we did not stop the flood of challans by making barriers of Threshold Test and Full Code Test. Or if we let it to flow in courts then this flood will wash away the courts as well as the prisons. So, it is the need of time. Say NO TO BLIND PROSECUTION. A few hours of our vigilant pondering at right time can save the time, money and energy of courts, prison and public. At last I request the incumbent officer to make it the slogan of the year and moto of the Prosecution.