P L D 2021 Lahore 105 (PLP)

MUHAMMAD QASIM KHAN, C.J.

Through the instant petition, petitioner seeks indulgence of this Court for her enlargement on post arrest bail in case FIR No. 293/2020 dated 21.06.2020 registered under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 at Police Station Miana Gondal, District Mandi Baha ud Din.

2. During the course of proceedings on 30.09.2020, learned counsel for the petitioner had vehemently argued that the instant FIR was lodged with mala fide intention in order to satisfy ulterior motives. In support of his contention learned counsel had brought into the notice of this Court that two different FIRs were registered at the same police station within a span of ten minutes: viz. FIR No.292/2020 was registered at 3:00 p.m. against husband of the petitioner (Muhammad Rafique) with regard to recovery of narcotic substance in front of his house while the instant FIR (No.293/2020) was registered at 3:10 p.m. against the present petitioner while narrating the story that charas was recovered from her and venue of recovery was mentioned backside of the same house. In order to evaluate the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner and ascertain the exact situation, the Superintendent of Police, Mandi Baha-ud-Din was directed to produce attested copy of 'roznamcha waqiyati' of the concerned Police Station. However, the same could not be produced. Jawad Ahmad Dogar, D.I.G. (Legal), who was present in connection with another case entered appearance and stated that through notification dated 15.12.2017 issued by the Provincial Police Officer, Government of the Punjab, amendments have been made in the Police Rules, 1934. A copy thereof has been placed on record, which is reproduced as under:- "No.43604/DIG/I.T:

In exercise of the powers conferred under Article 112 of the Police Order, 2002 (22 of 2002), the Provincial Police Officer, with the approval of Government of the Punjab, is pleased to direct that in the Police Rules, 1934, the following further amendments shall be made:-- AMENDMENTS In the Police Rules, 1934, in Chapter XXII: (1) for rule 22.3, the following shall be substituted: "22.3, Station Clerk:- (1) A Station clerk shall: (a) Be a literate head constable or IT literate officer; (b) Work under the supervision of the officer incharge of the police station; (c) Act as a clerk, accountant and record keeper; and (d) Be the custodian of the property at the police station. (2) A station clerk may be assisted by one or more assistant clerks. (3) The Provincial Police Officer may, by general or special order, assign any one or more tasks to any officer mentioned above."; and (2) in rule 22.4, for clause (a), the following shall be substituted: (a) He shall (i) maintain hard as well as soft copy (electronic copy) of the registers as per orders of the Provincial Police Officer; (ii) dispose of and be responsible for early disposal of all the correspondence as per instructions of the officer incharge of the police station; and (iii) write all reports and returns called for by the competent authority."

3. It is pertinent to mention that there was a wisdom underlying the maintaining of manual roznamcha so as to rule out the possibility of any fabrication, which can easily be incorporated in the soft copy. Hence, in all eventualities soft copy could never be a substitute of manual register maintained in terms of previous practice in vogue. Moreover, careful perusal of the amendment made in rule 22.4 divulges that maintaining of manual roznamcha has not been prohibited rather it delineates that in addition to hard copy, soft copy (electronic copy) of the registers shall be prepared. In this view of the matter, this Court is left with no other option except to issue a direction to Inspector General of Police, Punjab/Provincial Police Officer to immediately issue instructions to the police hierarchy throughout the Punjab to start/keep maintaining manual roznamcna waqiati as per previous practice. Moreover, the electronic copy of the same as introduced through amendment shall continue simultaneously. Reference in this regard may also be placed on the pronouncements made in the judgments reported in the cases of Muhammad Tariq v. Station House Officer, Police Station Saddar Jampur and another (2019 PCr.LJ 1403) and Khatoon Bibi v. The State and others (2020 LHC 2463). It is made clear that any lapse in this behalf shall be taken seriously. Inspector General of Police Punjab/Provincial Police Officer shall submit compliance report in this regard to the Registrar of this Court.

4. As far as merits of the case are concerned though it is alleged that at the time of arrest of the petitioner 2000 grams contraband charas was allegedly recovered from her, however, if the factum of lodging of FIR No.292/2020 against husband of the petitioner coupled with venue of recovery i.e. same house is juxtaposed with the facts of the instant case, this Court is persuaded to believe that possibility of manoeuvring false case implicating the petitioner in the instant case at the hands of complainant/local police cannot be ruled out. (Reliance is placed on the case law reported as 2010 MLD 1908 (Ziarat Khan v. The State). The petitioner is a woman folk, who is stated to be previous non-convict and behind the bars since the date of her arrest. Moreover, investigation being complete person of the petitioner is no more required for further investigation. All these facts when evaluated on the judicial parlance persuade this Court to believe that there exist sufficient grounds to interfere into the matter to grant the relief of bail under section 51(2) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. Accordingly, this petition is allowed and petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail subject to her furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (one lac rupees) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court. SA/A-2/L Bail grante