2004 PLP 1780 (YLR)

2. Precisely, the facts giving rise to this Constitutional petition are that the petitioner belongs to a singer party and often invited by the people on the eve of marriage ceremonies. On the night between 7/8th February, 2004, the petitioner was invited by one Shafqat Rafique on the eve of marriage ceremony of, his brother, at village Dhoke Khokharan; Kent Khalil Tehsil Gujjar Khan. The petitioner alongwith his wife and daughter performed the musical programme. Petitioner was on his way back to his house alongwith his wife and daughter after musical programme, and when reached near village Guliana, Police Station Gujar Khan the respondent No.2 took them into custody. He was confined in the police station from 7‑00 a.m. morning to 7‑00 p.m. evening. He was also deprived of cash amount of Rs.41,000 and driving licence. The respondents got his signatures on a plain paper which transpired later on, that a false case has been registered on behalf of the petitioner, coining a false, concocted and frivolous story. The petitioner then moved an application to the D.I.‑G. for the registration of criminal case against, the aforesaid respondents stating therein all the facts but his request was not acceded to which compelled him to file .the instant Constitutional petition.

3. Notice was issued to the State. The learned Assistant Advocate‑General appeared in response, thereto.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that he submitted an application Annexure 'A' to the writ petition to respondent No.1, for registration of the case against S.H.O. Ijaz Shah, A.S.‑I. Muhammad Afzal and Police Constable Muhammad Nadeem of Police Station Gujar Khan, District Rawalpindi who had robbed him of a cash amount of Rs.41,000 and driving licence. He also adds that the signatures were obtained' from the petitioner on a blank paper and thereafter got registered, a criminal case on behalf of the petitioner for the alleged abduction of his wife and daughter. He further adds that the petitioner was illegally confined in the police station from 7‑00 a.m. to 7‑00 p.m.

5. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Advocate‑General, refuting the contentions raised by petitioner's learned counsel submitted that the written complaint was submitted by the petitioner for the alleged abduction of his wife and daughter by Shafqat and Tahir residents of Dhoke Khokharan Kent Khalil, Tehsil Gujar Khan, District Rawalpindi alongwith two other persons. Also adds that Mian Akhtar Hayat, S.P. (Investigation) has conducted the investigation.

6. I have considered the respective contentions of the learned counsel for the patties.

7. The petitioner in the first instance made an application to the Deputy Inspector‑General of Police, Rawalpindi for re‑investigation, which was entrusted to Mubarak Zaib, A.S.P., Gujar Khan. Dissatisfied with the investigation, he again approached the D.I.‑G. who entrusted the investigation to Mian Akhtar Hayat, S.P. (Investigation). He found that the allegation of writ petitioner of having been deprived of money and other articles by the afore noted police officials, has not been proved." He relied on the statement of Chaudhary Habib Ullah one of the alleged companion of writ petitioner, who stated that the money earned during the musical show was with hint and was handed over to D.S.P. Raja Amjad Mehmood of the investigation cell. The learned counsel states that the amount of Rs.41,000 has now been paid to the writ petitioner by the officials of the investigation cell, Rawalpindi. The report was submitted for cancellation of the case registered on 8‑2‑2004.

8. The application Annexure 'A' to the writ petition discloses a cognizable offence. It appears that the police officials of the Police Station Gujar Khan mentioned in this petition have deprived the petitioner of his cash amount of Rs.41,000 and in order to save their skin secured signatures on blank paper to convert the same into written application for registration of the case. Admittedly, no occurrence of abduction has ever taken place. The petitioner, his wife and daughter were not abducted by any person and false F.I.R. was registered.

9. The Officer Incharge of the police station is under statutory obligation to register the case, if an information is brought to him in respect of cognizable offence. He has no discretion in the matter. The police is duty bound under the law to provide safeguard to the life and liberty of the citizens. Instead of discharging sacred obligation and coming true to the confidence reposed in it, being maintained by the exchequers through indirect taxation of the citizens mainly the poor and formidable class of this country, it has adopted posture completely adverse. This is a classic case of use of absolute power by the police officials for their personal greed. The Superintendent of Police (Investigation), Rawalpindi found that the occurrence as alleged in the F.I.R. registered on 8‑2‑2004, under sections 11/16, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, VII of 1979 at Police Station Gujar Khan, District Rawalpindi is totally false and, thus, recommended for its cancellation.

10. In view of the above discussion, copy of Annexure 'A' to this writ petition filed by the petitioner, be sent to the District Police Officer, Rawalpindi for registration of case against the officials named therein and entrust the investigation to a senior police officer of S.P. rank, who shall proceed strictly in accordance with law.

11. A copy of the complaint and the copy of this order be also sent to the Deputy Inspector‑General of Police, Rawalpindi Range/respondent No.1, who shall examine the complaint of the petitioner and direct holding of inquiry against the delinquent officials, on departmental side. N.H.Q./M‑197/L Petition accepted.