2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

JAVED IQBAL, J.‑‑‑This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment dated 11‑7‑2000 passed by learned Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, whereby the appeal preferred on behalf of petitioner has been accepted with the direction that the period, for which he remained out of service be treated as leave of the kind due but his prayer regarding reinstatement in service with all back‑benefits was turned down.

2. Precisely stated the facts of the case are that a complaint was lodged by tine Muhammad Ashraf against the petitioner alleging therein that his younger brother namely Muhammad Aslam was got involved in a false and concocted case for commission of Zina with some woman and the petitioner put Muhammad Aslam behind bars in police .lockup of Police Station Kaliana and set him free after receiving illegal gratification of Rs.2,500 In view of the serious nature of the allegation, the D.S.P., Pakpattan Sharif was deputed to inquire the matter by whom the petitioner was found guilty. The disciplinary proceedings were initiated which culminated into dismissal of the petitioner from service by means of order dated 28‑7‑1999. Being aggrieved an appeal was preferred before the D.I.G. Police which was partly accepted and the penalty of dismissal from service was converted into reduction in pay by one stage and the period for which the petitioner remained out of service was directed to be treated as leave without pay. The petitioner filed a revision petition before the Inspector .General of Police which was rejected on 17‑5‑2000. As a last resort the petitioner approached the Punjab Service Tribunal with the prayer that reduction in pay by one stage be set aside with all back‑benefits which has been rejected vide order impugned, hence this petition.

3. Ch. Muhammad Hussain Naqshabandi, learned Advocate Supreme Court appeared on behalf of petitioner and mainly contended that the petitioner should have been reinstated with all back‑benefits without reduction in pay by one stage in view of the affidavit submitted by the complainant and the witnesses exonerating the petitioner from the charges which were not taken into consideration by the D.S.P. Pakpattan Sharif Sadder, resulting in serious miscarriage of justice. It is next contended that he was found innocent by the D.S.P. Pakpattan Sharif Saddar and therefore, the question of any penalty does not arise. It is pointed out that undue importance has been given to the report of D.S.P. (Headquarters Pakpattan Sharif) by ignoring the report of D.S.P. Saddar.

4. We have carefully examined the contentions as agitated on behalf of petitioner and perused the judgment impugned. As mentioned herein above a very serious charge of illegal gratification of Rs.2,500 by employing deceitful means by keeping Muhammad Aslam in illegal confinement on the concocted and false charge of Zina was levelled against the petitioner which has been proved as a result of comprehensive inquiry conducted by the D.S.P. (Headquarters Pakpattan Sharif) who recorded the statements of seven witnesses including complainant in the presence of petitioner who was not exonerated by them The affidavit obtained subsequently by the petitioner would have no substantial bearing on the merits of the case having no legal sanctity whatsoever which otherwise could have been procured by a Police Officer by exerting influence and pressure.

5. It transpired from scrutiny of record that proper opportunity of hearing was afforded by the Superintendent of Police, D.I.G. of Police and Inspector General of Police. The petitioner should be thankful to his stars that a very lenient view has been taken by the D.I.G. of Police for the reasons best known to him. Be as it may the conclusion as arrived at by the learned Service Tribunal vide judgment impugned being well based hardly warrants any interference. No question of law of public importance is involved in the matter. The petition being merit less is dismissed and leave refused. M.H./M‑23/S Petition dismissed.