1992 P Cr (PLP)

‑‑‑‑S. 491‑‑‑Habeas corpus petition ‑‑‑Detenu after having been produced in Court by the Bailiff made a statement that he was taken into illegal custody by police three days prior to the visit of the Bailiff‑‑‑Station House Officer of Police Station while making his statement admitted that on the application of some creditor he was investigating in the matter without formal registration of the case against the detenu and that his act and conduct was not supported by any law or rules laid down for the registration and investigation of cognizable cases by police ‑‑‑Detenu not being wanted by police in any case was consequently set at liberty‑‑‑Superintendent of Police was, however, directed to probe into the matter as to why the S,H.O. had interfered into the dispute of a civil nature without formally registering the case against the detenu and if found guilty, to take suitable legal/departmental action against him so that in future no Police Officer violated the command of law. Malik Mushtaq Hussain for Petitioner. Respondent in person. Mst. Sakina Bibi filed this petition for the recovery of Muhammad Hanif son of Nawab Din from the illegal detention of the respondent. Vide order, dated 23‑9‑1991, a bailiff of this Court was deputed to recover the detenu from the illegal detention of the respondent, if available, and produce him before this Court today (24‑9‑1991). In pursuance of the aforesaid order, a bailiff of this Court recovered and produced the alleged detenu before this Court and submitted his report, which has been marked as Exh.P.A.

2. I recorded the statement of Muhammad Hanif detenu, who stated that he was taken into illegal custody by Ahmad Khan S.I. of Police Station Khudian three days prior to the visit of the bailiff. Muhammad lqbal Inspector/S.H.O. while making his statement admitted that on an application (Exh.D.A.) submitted to him by one Nawab son of Sher Muhamamd, resident of Wah Cantt. He was investigating into the facts whether the alleged detenu owed any money to said Nawab or not without the formal registration of the case when the bailiff visited the police station. He also conceded that the act and conduct of his is not being supported by any law or rules laid down for the registration and investigation of cognizable cases by the police.

3. After recording the statements of the detenu and the Inspector, whey I was going to order the registration of the criminal case against the aforesaid S.H.O., then the petitioner and the detenu humbly requested that they do not want to get the case registered against the aforesaid Police Officer due to the fear of revenge/reaction of the police, hence prayed for the dropping of proceedings.

4. During the hearing of numerous habeas corpus petitions it has come to light that it is a common practice with the S.H.Os., to keep innocent persons in illegal confinement at the police stations on the basis of some frivolous petitions, allegedly moved by some creditors for the settlement of civil disputes through police pressure, obviously after obtaining illegal gratification from the complainant and in order to fleece the innocent persons by misusing their official powers. In the eye of law, this action of the police officers is an offence, but due to the fear of revenge or retribution, the petitioners or the detenus generally do not ask for the registration of cases against the delinquent police officers. Encouraged by this sheep‑like attitude of the poor people, these police officers violate the command of law with impunity. There is not a single rule in the book which says that when someone whose duty it is to uphold the law violates that very law, he is not to be tried for the violation. If anything, a strict view must be taken when a police officer flouts the law. Normally a police officer should be a source of protection for the law‑abiding citizens and of terror for the criminals. In this country a police officer is almost invariably in cahoots with the criminals and a terror for the law‑abiding citizens. Keeping in view the above situation I direct the office to send all relevant papers to the Superintendent of Police, Kasur with the direction to probe into the matter why the S.H.O./Inspector has interfered into the dispute of civil nature without formally registering the case against the detenu. If during the enquiry, the police officer is found guilty, then the Superintendent of Police, Kasur should take suitable legal/departmental action against him, so that in future no police officer violates the command of law. It would be appropriate if pending enquiry, the police officer should either be suspended or transferred from the police station. The result of the enquiry should be communicated to the Deputy Registrar (Judi.) of this Court within two months without fail. The Superintendent of Police, Kasur is further directed to issue a circular letter/directions to all the police officers within his jurisdiction that in future they should not interfere into disputes of civil nature and should refrain from detaining persons illegally on the pretext of entering into settlement of money disputes and if thereafter any police officer is found violating these instructions then he should be appropriately dealt with.

5. As the alleged detenu is not wanted by the police in any case, he is set at liberty to go wherever he likes. The petition is disposed of accordingly. N.H.Q./S‑10/L??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition accepted.