2016 P Cr (PLP)

ERUM SAJAD GULL, J.

Through this Writ Petition the petitioner Abdul Qayyum has repudiated the order dated 02.01.2014 passed by the respondent No.1/District Police Officer Okara. Grievance of the Petitioner is that the District Police Officer had no authority to transfer the investigation a second time, in case FIR No. 1153/13 dated 12.10.2013 under section 489-F, P.P.C., Police Station A-Division Okara. In this Writ Petition, the complainant is, Respondent No.8, Sheikh Ehsan and the accused is the petitioner, Abdul Qayyum.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that after the recommendation of the District Standing Board Okara, the investigation was changed vide order dated: 17.12.2013 and assigned to the respondent No.3 Naseer Ahmad, Inspector and Respondent No.

4. Incharge Investigation Police Station B-Division Okara. The respondent No.1/District Police Officer, had no legal authority to bequeath the investigation to the respondent No.5 Ahmad Raza Inspector and Respondent 6/Muhammad Sabir ASI vide order dated: 02.01.2014. Hence, the impugned order dated 02.01.2014 be set aside, as the same being illegal and passed in violation to Article 18-A of the Police Order 2002 (The Punjab (Amendment) Act, XXI of 2013).

3. Learned Additional Advocate General, while supporting the impugned order, has argued that it was not a change of investigation but was just an entrustment of investigation, which is not the same. And as the investigation was merely entrusted to the other team of Investigating Officers hence it does not fall within the ambit of transfer of investigation therefore the impugned order dated 02.01.2014 is a legal order and has not been passed in violation to Section 18-A of the Police Order, 2002 (The Punjab (Amendment) Act, XXI of 2013).

4. Arguments have been heard and record has been perused with the assistance of the learned counsel. The relevant law, Article 18-A of the Police Order, 2002 (The Punjab (Amendment) Act, XXI of 2013) has been read as well and pondered upon.

5. The first change of investigation was requested by the petitioner Abdul Qayyum, who submitted an application, which was accepted by the Respondent No.1 District Police Officer Okara. After which the matter was referred to the District Standing Board Okara. And vide order dated 17.12.13 of the District Standing Board Okara the said case was entrusted for investigation to respondent No.3 Naseer Ahmad, Inspector and Respondent No.4/Incharge Investigation Police Station B-Division Okara. The Respondent No.8 Sheikh Ehsan after the first change of investigation presented another application to Respondent No.1 District Police Officer, stating that Respondent No.3 Naseer Ahmad Inspector has already investigated the said case so the case be transferred to another police officer or a team of police officers. The Respondent No.1 District Police Officer Okara accepted the application of the Respondent No.8 Sheikh Ehsan and acquisitioned the investigation from the respondent No.3 Naseer Ahmad, Inspector and respondent No.4/Incharge Investigation Police Station B-Division Okara and entrusted the investigation to respondent No.5 Ahmad Raza Inspector and Respondent No.6. Muhammad Sabir ASI vide order dated: 02.01.2014.

6. The Respondent No.1 District Police Officer submitted a report, before this Court to explain as to why he has over stepped his authority. The stance taken by the said respondent is that he did not transfer the case but in fact entrusted it to other police officers and hence there has been no violation of section 18-A of the Police Order, 2002 (The Punjab (Amendment) Act, XXI of 2013)

7. The explanation submitted by the Respondent No.1 District Police Officer and the argument furnished by the learned Additional Advocate General that the case for investigation was 'entrusted' and not 'transferred', has no force as the law, laid down in section 18-A of the Police Order, 2002 (The Punjab (Amendment) Act, XXI of 2013) is very clear. The purpose for inserting section 18-A through an amendment was to ensure impartial and transparent investigation. Under the amended law the authority to transfer an investigation from one Police Officer or team of Police Officers, to another is possible only by an order passed by the relevant Board and no Senior Police Officer, however senior he may be, has the authority to transfer an investigation at his whim. The word entrustment and transfer mean one and the same thing. The Respondent No.1 District Police Officer Okara had no authority to interpret the law; his duty is to act in accordance with the law laid down.

8. The law for transfer of Police investigation is very clearly laid down in section 18-A of the Police Order, 2002 (The Punjab (Amendment) Act, XXI of 2013) without any ambiguity. For the first change of investigation, an application has to be submitted to the Head of the District Police. It is then the discretion of the District Police Officer to entertain the said application. If he accepts the said application, then within seven working days he has to place it before the District Standing Board. The said Board will then give its opinion in writing mentioning reasons to allow or disallow the change/transfer of investigation from the investigation officer or team of investigation officers to another, having the same rank or higher rank than the previous Investigation Officers. After the decision has been passed on one application for the transfer of investigation by the District Standing Board, the head of a District Police cannot entertain another application for transfer of investigation. And the subsequent application for change of investigation will be termed as a request for a second change of investigation. For this an application has to be submitted before the Regional Police Officer then it's the discretion of the Regional Police Officer to forward the application to the Regional Standing Board within seven days or not to entertain the application. But once the Regional Standing Board decides the application, the matter goes out of the domain of the Regional Police Officer. Then a third application for change of investigation has to be submitted before the Provincial Police Officer. The Provincial Police Officer is the Inspector General of Police, appointed under Article 11 of the Police Order 2002. It is the discretion of the Provincial Police Officer to entertain the application or disallow it. If the application is entertained by the Provincial Police Officer then he has to put the said application before the Standing Review Board. The District Standing Board, The Regional Standing Board and the Standing Review Board are all defined in Article 18-A of the Police Order, 2002 (The Punjab (Amendment) Act, XXI of 2013).

9. For reasons as afore mentioned this Writ Petition is accepted and the impugned order dated 02-01-2104 passed by the respondent No.1/District Police Officer Okara is declared to have been passed without lawful authority and in violation to Article 18-A of the Police Order, 2002 (The Punjab (Amendment) Act, XXI of 2013), is therefore set aside. MH/A-95/L Petition allowed.