1987 P Cr (PLP)
AHMAD SHER‑ ‑Petitioner Versus S.H.O. MITTHA TIWANA‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1987 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | AHMAD SHER‑ ‑Petitioner Versus S.H.O. MITTHA TIWANA‑‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 P Cr (PLP)?
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: 1987 P Cr (PLP) (AHMAD SHER‑ ‑Petitioner Versus S.H.O. MITTHA TIWANA‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- ‑‑S. 491‑‑Habeas corpus‑‑Bailiff of Court finding detenu confined in police lock‑ up‑‑Moharrir Head Constable misbehaving with Bailiff and ran out with Roznamcha but caught hold of by Bailiff and Roznamcha was then taken, away by somebody whom complainant recognised as Police Officer (S.I.) concerned‑‑Such Police Officer appearing in Court and stating that he was not that person who got Roznamcha from Moharrir and disappeared‑‑ Bailiff stating that lot of confusion had been created at Police Station at relevant time, therefore, he was not sure if said police official was person who took Roznamcha from Moharrir and disappeared‑‑Order of Higher Police Authorities produced by counsel for respondent Police Officer showing that Moharrir was placed under suspension by department and an inquiry was started against him for misbehaving with Bailiff‑‑Police Officer concerned directed to take down statement of detenu released and if such statements disclosed commission of cognizable offence a case would be registered and investigations started in accordance with law.
- Inayat Ullah Cheema for Petitioner.
- Ehsan Ullah Khan Lilla for Respondent.
- 4. Mr. Ehsan Ullah Khan Lilla, Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent S.H.O., has produced a copy of the order, dated 17‑5‑1987 passed by S.P., Khushab, showing that M.H.C. Muhammad Mukhtar has been placed under suspension for misbehaving with the bailiff. That order further shows that D.S.P. Umar Farooq Bhatti has been appointed to inquire into the matter. Both the detenus stated that they were brought from their residence to the police station on Saturday (9‑5‑198'7) and were kept continuously in police lock up till they were released on bail. They were also physically tortured.
Judgment & Decree
Ehsan Ullah Khan Lilla for Respondent. Date of hearing: 18th May, 1987. This habeas corpus petition was moved by Ahmad Sher praying for .the release of Muhammad Shafi and Muhammad Khan, his relatives, from illegal detention of S.H.O. Mitha Tiwana, District Khushab. A bailiff was deputed under the orders of this Court on 16‑5‑1987 to recover and produce the detenu on 18‑5‑1987 Ali Akbar Shah, the bailiff, ha: submitted his report in writing.
2. It is stated in the report that the bailiff on visiting the premises of Police Station Mitha Tiwana on 16‑5‑1987 at 8‑05 p.m., seized Roznamcha of the police station and started searching for the detenu. Meanwhile M.H.C. Muhammad Mukhtar of the police station suddenly snatched away the Roznamcha from him and ran out. He pursued him and caught hold of him outside the door of the office. In the meantime, a person in civilian dress appeared there whom the Roznamcha was handed over by the M.H.C. That person then disappeared with the Roznamcha. The bailiff was told by the petitioner that the said civilian person was S.I. Shaukat Ali. The two detenus were, however, found confined in the police lock up. It is further stated in the report that at 8‑40 p.m., S.I. Shaukat Ali came to the police station and on his direction the aforesaid Muharrir after a lot of hesitation produced the Roznamcha at 9‑40 p.m., before the bailiff. On checking the Roznamcha the bailiff found Report No. 3, dated 16‑5‑1987 purported to have been recorded at 3‑20 p.m., showing arrest of the two detenus under section 107/151, Cr.P.C. The detenu who are present in Court are stated to have been released by the Ilaqa Magistrate since 17‑ 5‑ 1987.
3. S.I. Shaukat Ali who is present in Court, states on oath that it was not he who had disappeared with the Roznamcha of the police station on the day the bailiff had visited the said police station. The bailiff states that as lot of confusion had been created at the police station at the relevant time, therefore, he is not sure if S.I. Shaukat Ali (present in Court) is the person who took Roznamcha from the Moharrir and had disappeared.
4. Mr. Ehsan Ullah Khan Lilla, Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent S.H.O., has produced a copy of the order, dated 17‑5‑1987 passed by S.P., Khushab, showing that M.H.C. Muhammad Mukhtar has been placed under suspension for misbehaving with the bailiff. That order further shows that D.S.P. Umar Farooq Bhatti has been appointed to inquire into the matter. Both the detenus stated that they were brought from their residence to the police station on Saturday (9‑5‑198'7) and were kept continuously in police lock up till they were released on bail. They were also physically tortured.
5. Since the detenus have been released I need not pass any order setting them free. However, the fact that this petition was moved on 14‑5 1987 shows that the detenus were detained by the police of Mitha Tiwana Police Station since 9‑5‑1987. S.I. Shaukat Ali is directed to take down the statements of both the detenu and if they disclose the commission of cognizable offence he shall register a case. S.P., Khushab in that event shall depute an honest police officer not below the rank of Inspector of Police to investigate the case in accordance with law.
6. As for the conduct of M.H.C. Muhammad Mukhtar, I refrain from passing any order at the moment in this regard because the S.P., Khushab, has ordered inquiry into his conduct. He shall, however, report the result of the inquiry and the action taken by him against M.H.C., within a month to this Court. The office shall open a separate file on judicial side and put it up before me after the Eid Holidays.
7. The amount of security shall be refunded to the petitioner,. The petition stands disposed of. M.Y.H./A‑87/L Order accordingly.