1999 PLP 1882 (MLD)
Ch. ATTAH-MOHAYO-UD-DIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and 2 others — Respondents
| Citation | 1999 PLP 1882 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Ch. ATTAH-MOHAYO-UD-DIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and 2 others — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999 PLP 1882 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1999 PLP 1882 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1999 PLP 1882 (MLD) (Ch. ATTAH-MOHAYO-UD-DIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Mian Maqbool Alam for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 468/471/409, 420
Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S.5
Punjab Anti-Corruption Establishment Rules, 1985, Rr.5, 6, 7 & 8-- onstitutlon of Pakistan ( 1973). Art, 199
Constitutional petition
Quashing of F.I.R.
Anti-Corruption Establishment had not proceeded in the manner provided in Rr. 5 to 8 of the Punjab Anti-Corruption Establishment Rules, 1985, which was mandatory
Accused had not only alleged mala fide on the part of the Anti-Corruption Establishment but had also successfully established the same, presumption of regularity with regard to official acts stood rebutted-- Allegation of mala fide was not vague but clear and particular and the ground of said mala fides had been proved
Registration of the F.I.R. was, thus, based on mala fides which was ordered to be quashed.
Judgment & Decree
Provided further that for those officers mentioned in the first proviso who are in B.P.S-19 such permission shall be accorded by the Chief Secretary.
8. Registration of cases.
(1) Criminal cases shall be registered by the Establishment under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and under such sections of the Pakistan, Penal Code, as have been set forth in the schedule to the Ordinance. (2). Criminal cases shall be registered against accused public servants under the written orders of officer of Establishment mentioned below:-- (a) Public Servants B.P.S. 1-16 in Not Below a Deputy Director (b) Public Servants B.P.S-17 and 18 in Not below an Additional Director. (c) Public Servants and above. in Director, Provided that no case shall, however, be registered by the Director against public servants of the status of Commissioner, Secretary to Provincial Government, Heads of Attached Departments and, other officers of B.P.S-20 and above without the prior permission of the Governor: Provided further that for those public servants mentioned in the first proviso who are in B.P.S. 19, such permission shall be accorded by the Chief Secretary: Provided further that no prior permission shall be required for registration of a case against a public servant caught as a result or trap arranged, by the Establishment under the supervision of a Magistrate, in the act of committing an offence specified in the schedule to the Ordinance. In such a case a report shall immediately be made to the Chief Secretary, the Administrative Secretary and immediate superior of the public servant concerned if he is in B.P.S-16 and above and to the appointing authority and immediate superior if the public servant is in B.P.S-15 and below. (3) If the competent Authority under sub-rule (2) decides not to register case he shall record reasons therefor. "
4. According to the above rules the first step was the receipt of information, that is, the complaint and the second was that of holding preliminary inquiry by the competent officer of the Anti-Corruption Establishment by joining the person against whom the information has been received so that identity of the complainant and the genuineness of the complaint is ascertained and thirdly, if it is so ascertained then to register the case and proceed further in accordance with law. In the present case, the Anti-Corruption Establishment has not proceeded in the manner which was mandatory. The registation of the impugned F.I.R. in the circumstances is based on mala fide. It is a case in which the petitioner has not only alleged mala fide on the part of the Establishment but also successfully established it and the presumption of regularity with regard to official acts stood rebutted. Secondly, the allegation of mala fide was not vague but clear and particular and the ground of mala fide alleged, has been proved. In these circumstances, the F.I.R. impugned merits to be quashed and is hereby quashed. N.H.Q./A.321/L F.I.R quashed.