1974 P Cr (PLP)
NAZIR AHMAD‑Petitioner Versus KHUSHI MUHAMMAD AND 2 OTHERS‑Respondents
| Citation | 1974 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Iqbal, CJ |
| Parties | NAZIR AHMAD‑Petitioner Versus KHUSHI MUHAMMAD AND 2 OTHERS‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1974 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1974 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Iqbal, CJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1974 P Cr (PLP) (NAZIR AHMAD‑Petitioner Versus KHUSHI MUHAMMAD AND 2 OTHERS‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- F. E. Jaffri for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑ S. 154‑First information Report‑Police Officer statutorily bound to enter report of cognizable offence in prescribed register‑Whether to record such report or not‑Not dependent on sweet will of police‑Police Officer failing to record such report‑Liable to be dealt with for neglect of duty‑Petition submitted to High Court disclosing commission of cognizable offence‑Copy of petition sent to Police Officer concerned with direction to register case.
Judgment & Decree
It has been reported by A. S. I. Ali Akbar that he made a search of the alleged detenu with the help of A. S. I. Abdul Aziz of Police Station Burewala City, but could not trace out Mst. Nasim Akhtar. No further action by this Court is possible, unless the petitioner is in a position to find out the place where the alleged detenu is being kept.
2. However, I find that the facts alleged in this case make out a cognizable case. In paragraph 9 of the petition it was alleged in the following terms:‑ "That the petitioner approached the local Police for setting Mst. Nasim Akhtar detenu at liberty. The respondents were very influential with the police. Therefore the police took no cognizance of this matter and did not help the petitioner to release Mst. Nasim Akhtar detenu from the illegal confinement of the respondents." Without commenting upon the correctness or otherwise of the above state ment of the petitioner, I would like to observe that a police officer is bound to receive a complaint when it is preferred to him, or where the commission of an offence is reported to him orally he is bound to take down the complaint. If he does not incorporate in the register a complaint so made, he fads to perform a statutory duty as a public servant and, therefore, renders himself to be dealt with by his superior officers for neglect of duty. Thus, it does not depend on the sweet will of a police officer who may or may not record it. As held in M. Anwar v. Station House Officer Civil Lines Police Station Lahore and another (P L D 1972 Lah. 493) if the information given to a Police Officer is in respect of the commission of an offence which is cognizable, be is under a statutary obligation under section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to enter it in the register which is maintained at every Police Station for the purpose.
3. A copy of this petition, along with a copy of this order, should be sent to the Station House Officer concerned with the direction that since the allegations contained in ‑the petition prima facie make out a cognizable case, he should register a case accordingly.
4. By the fact that I have directed the registration of a case, I should not be understood to mean that the respondents are in fact guilty of the offence alleged against them. It would entirely depend on the investigation which is to be carried on the basis of the registration of the case.
5. Subject to the above remarks this petition is disposed of accordingly. Petition disposed of accordingly.