P L D 2009 Lahore 69 (PLP)

The learned counsel filed this intra-Court Appeal whereby he has called in question impugned order dated 31-7-2008 passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court.

2. In the impugned order, the learned Single Bench set aside order of the learned ex-Officio Justice of Peace to the extent that opinion of D.S.P. Legal was illegal and without lawful effect. To appreciate the real controversy, the relevant portion of the order of the learned Justice of the Peace which is also reproduced in the order of the learned Single Bench, is referred to as under:-- "I have come to the view that criminal liability cannot be attached with the legal opinion given by the respondent No.2 (D.S.P. Legal) under order of D.P.O. and it is sufficient to observe that the said legal opinion can be set aside by this Court in the capacity of the Justice of Peace and with the observation that the same was not required." It may be pointed out that ex-Officio Justice of Peace is not a Court and it does not possess any judicial power. A Sessions Judge or Addl. Sessions Judge has been conferred upon special powers of an ex-Officio Justice of Peace under section 25, Cr.P.C. In the said capacity, they have been vested with some executive powers which are given in section 22-A (6), Cr.P.C. which is reproduced as under:-- "22-A(6).

An ex-officio Justice of the peace may issue appropriate directions to the police authorities concerned on a complaint regarding:- (i) non registration of criminal case; (ii) transfer of investigation from one police officer to another; and (iii) neglect, failure or excess committed by a police authority in relation to its functions and duties." In the third area of jurisdiction, as mentioned above i.e. regarding neglect, failure or excess committed by a police authority in relation to its functions and duties, the ex-officio Justice of the peace may issue an appropriate direction. This point has been further elaborated by a Full Bench of this Court reported in PLD 2005 Lahore

470. According to the said precedent, an ex-officio Justice of Peace has only executive powers and no judicial powers at all. Therefore, if the learned ex-Officio Justice of Peace had noticed some illegality or excess of authority in the order of the D.S.P. Legal, he could have referred to the matter to a senior officer to the D.S.P. Legal to rectify the excess to jurisdiction exercised by D.S.P. Legal instead of passing a judicial order considering or treating himself as a Court. He could also have alluded to Additional Inspector-General of Police (Investigation) or SP Investigation concerned to consider the case for change of investigation.

3. In view of the above, the view of the learned Single Bench, that the ex-Officio Justice of the Peace was not conferred with any judicial jurisdiction to make an observation with regard to legality or otherwise of opinion of D.S.P. Legal, is correct. We do not find any legal infirmity in the observation/finding of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge given in para-9 of the impugned order. In view of the above discussion and reasons, we dismiss this appeal. H.B.T./H-29/L Appeal dismissed.