1999 P Cr (PLP)

5. Now I intend to examine the case-law. (i) Mr. Justice Sheikh Ijaz Nisar also took note of inaction of the police functionary in Muhammad Yousuf's case PLD 1997 Lah. 135 and the relevant observation is as follows:-- "So far as the grievance of the petitioner about the lack of interest on the part of administration is concerned, I may state that under the law it is the collective responsibility of the police and the District Magistrate to have effective control over the Local Police so that they perform their duties within the four comers of law. Under the police rules, the District Magistrate can even direct the Superintendent of Police to take suitable measures for the protection and detection of crime." In the same judgment the relevant observation regarding sections 29 and 23 of the Police Act is as follows:-- "Police Officer who neglects or refuses to register a case, exposes himself to an action under section 29 of the Police Act. The police officer should be mindful of the penalties provided by law for the neglect of duty by them. Section 29 of the Police Act says that a police officer who is guilty of any violation of any duty of wilful breach or neglect of any rule or regulation or law, order made by competent authority or offers any unwarrantable violence to any person in his custody, shall be liable to 3 months imprisonment, besides being proceeded against departmentally. Refusal to record first information report was held to be violation of mandatory provision of Chapter XVI of the Cr.P.C. and of section 23 of Police Act, 1861 on the part of police officer by a Full Bench of Lahore High Court in Ghulam Abbas v. The State (PLD 1968 Lahore 101).." (ii) Mr. Justice Sardar Muhammad Iqbal also considered this proposition of law in M. Anwar's case PLD 1972 Lah. 493 and observed as follows:-- "We would like to observe that if there is an information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, it falls under section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and a Police Officer is under a statutory obligation to enter it in the prescribed register. The condition precedent is simply twofold, first it must be an information and secondly, it must relate to a cognizable offence on the face of it and not merely in the light of subsequent events." (iii) The Honourable Supreme Court has considered this aspect of the case in Syed Hussain Shah's case 1996 SCMR 504 and observed as follows:-- "So far the second order dated 18-5-1994 is concerned, the learned Judge has appointed Maj. Mubashrullah, S.P. (Special), Lahore, who was present in Court to merely go and inquire about the abductee (Ashraf) and to check the records. This was only with a view to obtain proper records, which may not be manipulated or destroyed. From the facts, the learned Judge had concluded that the police officers-in-charge of the case were not acting honestly and bona fide. Therefore, a suggestion was made to the D.I.G. to entrust the investigation to senior police officers and name of the aforestated S.P. was recommended. However, option was left to D.I.G., to do so. This in any manner does not amount to interference with the investigation or to take charge of the investigation himself or to appoint an officer for carrying out the investigation. The D.I.G., will take necessary action as he may deem fit." (iv) Similar proposition of law qua the jurisdiction of this Court was considered by the Honourable Supreme Court in Anwar Ahmad Khan's case 1996 SCMR 24 and observed as follows:-- "The High Court in passing the impugned order did not interfere with the investigation. It merely required the concerned officer to be more alert, vigilant, prompt and dutiful. " Finally in the aforesaid case following principle of law was laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court. "It is well-settled principle that where investigation is mala fide or without jurisdiction, the High Court in exercise of its Constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 is competent to correct such proceedings and pass necessary order to ensure justice and fairplay. The investigating authorities do not have the entire and total authority of running investigation according to their whishes." (v) Mr. Justice Khalil-ur-Rehman Khan the then Chief Justice of Lahore High Court considered the historical background of the Police Department in Muhammad Anwar's case PLD 1997 Lahore 15 in the following words:-- "In the colonial era police was under bureaucratic control. Since the bureaucracy was largely foreign and had no local political interest the police remained neutral. It, therefore, functioned effectively. At Independence control was shifted from bureaucratic to political control. Consequently, political influence came into play in law enforcement this compromised the neutrality of the police. The levels of interference escalated erratically but in the mid eighties a new phase of ' no holds barred' interference was initiated. Now, it has become a tradition that no area of Police administration is sacrosanct. Persons of privilege may as of right interference into every conceivable aspect of policing, thus, destroying the essentials of command and control. " After considering the historical background the following principle was laid down: "In case where abuse of statutory power of failure to exercise statutory power or mala fide exercise of statutory power is brought to the notice of the Court, intervention or judicial scrutiny cannot be refused merely for the reasons that in the colonial era the police was under bureaucratic control which used the control, unless the imperial interest demanded otherwise, for doing even handed justice amongst subjects as the purpose was to maintain law and order. " (vi) Mr. Justice Faqir Muhammad Khokhar in Ahmad Saleem's case 1998 PCr.LJ 170 laid down a principle. "The conduct and manner of the investigation is normally not to be scrutinized during the course of the Constitutional proceedings which would amount to interference in the police investigation. " (vii) The law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in Shahnaz Begum's case PLD 1971 SC 677 also does not give free hand to the police to play havoc with the life, honour and liberty of citizens and to use it as a lever to commit atrocities on innocent citizens under the garb of investigation but a window has been left open for the High Court where the action is based on mala fide or without jurisdiction. (viii) In the case of Adam Jee Insurance Company v. Assistant Director 1989 PCr.LJ 1921 it was observed by their Lordships of the Supreme Court that proceedings under Article 199 of the Constitution will be competent even inquiry/investigation if it encroaches upon any fundamental right .as guaranteed by the Constitution or it violates some other law or is motivated for mala fide reasons. (ix) The duties and obligations of the police officers/officials were discussed by the Full Bench of this Court in Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto's case PLD 1978 Lah. 523 and the relevant observations are as follows:-- "The provisions in Chapter XIV of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code particularly sections 154, 157 leave no manner of doubt that it is incumbent upon the officer in charge of the police station to record the First Information Report as well as to start investigation on receipt of such information to apprehend the real culprit end to bring him to book. Similar is the provision of section 23 of the Police Act. It provides that it shall be the duty of every Police Officer to detect and bring the offenders to justice and to apprehend all persons

whom is legally authorized to apprehend and for whose apprehension sufficient grounds exist. " (x) Mr. Justice Tanvir Ahmad Khan, in Muhammad Aslam's case NLR 1992 UC 770 has laid down the following principle:-- "The petitioner has challenged the action of the police functionaries whose duty is to protect the citizens against all kinds of accesses from any corner. In this case instead of performing their duty strictly within the four corners of law, the guardians of law themselves sided with the law breakers." (xi) Mr. Justice Mian Allah Nawaz in Ghulam Shahbaz's case PLD 1991 Lah. 241 ]aid down the following principle:-- "The police station is the lowest unit for the exercise of criminal jurisdiction by police officials. Its limitations are fixed by Provincial Government under section 4(1)(s) of the Criminal Procedure Code. These posts/stations are of extreme significance. The Incharge of these police stations are concerned with the enforcement of laws and regulation of commission of fraud, crime, preservation of public order, prevention of conflicts of rights and insuring to each an uninterrupted enjoyment of rights under law. Should these police station become vehicle of oppression and torture? should these places become congenial soil for breeding of crimes/breaches of law? Can such Police Officers be termed as the preservers of law? I am clear in my mind that no civilized society will countenance such a situation. From the examination of sections 2, 3, 4, 5 and 7 it is quite clear that the police services comprises of subordinate and supervisory police hierarchy. At the apex is the Inspector-General of Police of Province who has been armed with even magisterial powers. In this scheme the District Magistrate is also invested with powers of general control and direction of police force within his District. Section 29 stipulates penalties for neglect of duties of Police Officers. In short the superior Police Officers are under statutory duty to watch the performance of subordinate police officials and see that they do not transgress their powers. The superior Police Officers have been given powers to take departmental as well as criminal actions in respect of the delinquent officials." (xii) Full Bench of this Court also considered this aspect of the case in Ghulam Abbas's case PLD 1968 Lah. 101 and observed that an investigation by the police commences with the first step taken by the Police Officers towards the entertainment of the offence and the culprit thereof. (xiii) Indian Supreme Court in Saladnna's case 1980 Cr.LJ 98 has also observed in the following words:-- "As a general rule, the High Court should not interfere with a criminal proceedings at the stage of investigation by issuing a writ under Article 226, because investigation of an offence is the function of the police, under the supervision of the State Government." (xiv) The Bombay High Court of India also considered the inaction of the police in Shankar's case AIR 1952 Bom. 277 and laid down the following principle:-- "Where a public officer has refused to perform his statutory duties, mandamus would issue to compel him to perform those duties. " (xv) The High Court has jurisdiction where the public functionary acted beyond its sphere. I am fortified by the judgment of this Court reported in Muhammad Khan Malik's case PLD 1993 Lah.

141. The High Court must not generally grant leave by way of issuing mandamus during the pendency of the criminal investigation but they may interfere to prevent manifest injustice being perpetuated anO where power of investigation is being exercised mala fide by the police or where prima facie there is no allegation of commission of cognizable offence in the First Information Report. The Indian Supreme Court also took the same view in Assistant Collector v. G.H. Industries AIR 1979 SC 1889, AIR 1977 SC 1487, State of Karnataka v. Mumu Sawami's case AIR 1982 SC 949 and Saladann's case AIR 1980 326. (xvi) It is a settled principle of law since 1945 in Kh. Nazir Ahmad's case AIR 1945 PC 18 that High Court have very limited jurisdiction to interfere at the stage of investigation. The Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan has followed the view of Privy Council in Begum Shahnaz's case PLD 1971 SC 677, subsequently all the case-law on the subject was again reviewed and discussed by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan in Brigadier Imtiaz's case 1994 SCMR 2142 and upheld the view of the Privy Council. This Court in Agha Nadim's case 1998 PCr.LJ 181 observed as follows:-- "When the case registered without prior permission of the Quality Control Board set up under section 11 of the Act, is without lawful authority and based on malice and can be quashed." (xvii) Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan also casts duty on the Police Department and other functionaries of the State to act in accordance with law. Articles 4 and 5 of the Constitution require each and every citizen of Pakistan to act in accordance with law. Article 5 of the Constitution has been taken into consideration by the Honourable Supreme Court in Chaudhri Zahoor Elahi's case PLD 1975 SC 383 which laid down the principle as follows:-- "Even the Prime Minister is under clause 2 of Article 5 of the Constitution to obey the Constitution and Law as that is the basic obligation of every citizen. Since neither Constitution nor any law can possibly authorize him to commit a criminal act or do anything which is contrary to law, the immunity cannot extend to illegal or unconstitutional acts." (xviii) The Honourable Supreme Court has considered ideology of Pakistan in Mrs. Benazir Bhutto's case PLD 1988 SC 416 and relevant observation is as follows:-- "There cannot be any doubt that the Ideology of Pakistan is based on Muslim nationhood and includes Islamic Ideology which in clear terms in the Constitution means Injunctions of Holy Qura'n and Surmah and was the principal factor in the concept of Holy Qura'n and Surmah and was the Principal factor in the concept of Muslims Nationhood. It is this Pakistan Ideology which resulted in the partition of the sub continent and is known as two nation theory." The Constitutional development has taken note of the then Mr. Justice Muhammad Afzal Lone, in Ghulam Mustafa Khar's case PLD 1988 Lah. 49. (xix) Mr. Justice Mian Allah Nawaz, has taken note of the historical process of the creation of the country and importance of the Police Department in Ghulam Shahbaz's case PLD 1991 Lah. 241 in the following terms:-- "that our cherished State was achieved at altar of colossal loss of human life and material resources of Muslims under the dynamic leadership of Quaid-e-Azam. Our State is Federal Islamic Republic; our Governments are not the Government of dynasties, individuals or few privileged. Our Governments are of laws with orientation of golden principle as enshrined in the Holy Qura'n and Sunnah. The various departments of Government are charged with execution of their duties as a repository of State. These powers flow from the Constitution. In this scheme, police is the branch of the Government which is assigned with the duty of preservation of public order prevention/detection and punishment of crimes. To me this department of Government is of extreme importance."

6. This judgment cannot be completed without having a glimpse of Islamic Legal System. Mr. Vijay Kumar Dewan in his Book Prosecuting System in India (Practice and Procedure) discussed the legal system of Islam in the following terms:-- "As like the Hindu Law the concept of Muslim Law also held that the king derived his authority from Qura'n and the ruler was subordinate to law the main source of Islamic Law or Muslim Law i.e. Shar in Qura'n and Sunnah or Hadis. The Prophet was considered to be the best interpreter of Qur'an. On all matters on which Qura'n was silent Sunnah or Hadis was regarded as authority. Because of divergent views taken on various provisions of Qura'n by eminent Muslim Jurists, four well defined branches or schools of Muslim Law came to be recognized by different sections of the Muslims. Out of the four the Hanafi School founded by Abu Hanifa (699-767 A.D.) was the most popular in India, few in India however, followed the Shafii School founded by Muhammad Ibn Indris Ash-Shafi (767-820 A.D.). The other two i.e. the Maliki School founded by Malik Ibn Annas (713-797 A.D.) and the Hanbali School based on the teachings of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (780-855 A. D.) were not popular in India." The author further classified criminal offences under the Islamic Penal Law as follows:-- (i) Offences against God. (11) Offences against the State, and (iii) Crimes against private individuals. The same author discussed the Islamic Justice in the following terms:-- "... The works of judiciary however, worked systematically in view of considerable importance attached by Akbar and his successors and Akbar had definite zeal to administer justice impartially and he had once remarked. If I were guilty of an unjust act would rise in judgment against myself. What shall I say then of my sons, my kindred and others. (In this regard reference may be made to the book History and Culture, Vol. 7, pages 547 to 552, Aini Akbari Vo1.111 p.434; Akhbarnama, Vol. III and Storia do mogar, Vol 1, p.167) Akbar used to devote some time every morning for judicial works at the Jharoka Darshan and Thursday was exclusively kept for judicial work, wherein the top officers such as Chief Qazi, Mufties and other law dignitaries and Kotwal of the town used to participate. He used to decide cases after hearing and ascertaining the law from the jurists. Abul Fazal the Chronicile Writer of Akbar's Court has given an account of the Royal Court-- He (Akbar) opens the gates of justice and holds an open Court. In the investigation in to the cases of the oppressed, he placed no reliance on testimony or on the oaths, which are resources of the crafty, but draws his conclusions from the contradictions in the narratives, the physiognomy, and sublime resources and noble conjectures. Truth takes her place in this centre. In this work he spends not less than one and half pahars (i.e. about five hours)'. Jahangir followed the ideals of his father. He also in addition to deciding cases every morning had set apart Tuesday exclusively for judicial work. Shahjahan also upheld the maxim of his father that justice must be enforced. Aurangzeb was also very keen in administering impartial justice except in cases which concerned the interest of prestige of Islam the arrangement of transacting judicial business personally by the sovereign was not disturbed even when the Emperor happened to be on tours on when he was engaged in a military expedition. The Emperor decided both civil and criminal cases and his Court was not only the highest Court of appeal, but also sometimes a Court. of first instance. Sometimes the Emperor used to appoint a commission of inquiry and issue instructions to decide cases on the basis of facts revealed in the investigation on the spot. Usually the cases deserving capital punishment were decided by the King himself. Such cases even if tried by Governors or other authorities, were forwarded to the capital for the Kings' final order. The standing instructions were that no one was to be executed until the Emperor had given his orders for the third time."

7. Keeping in view the historical background of the creation of the country beginning with the struggle started by late Sultan Haider Ali of Mysor and his noble, brave and courageous one late Tipu Sultan Shaheed who gave his precious life including life of his two beloved sons who fought for freedom, and ultimately achieved the goal of freedom under dynamic leadership of Quaid-i Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, who was motivated by the spirit of great national poet Dr. Allama Muhammad Iqbal; and sacrifices made by millions of Muslims of this sub-continent, we must remember that this freedom was formally recognized by the imperial power by passing the Independence Act, 1947 which gave birth to our esteemed country.

8. Before coming to final conclusion, let me quote that once Late Mian Muhammad Mushtaq Gormani met Lord Wavel who during discussion made some remarks about the founder of Pakistan which are very relevant to reproduce here for the purpose of building national character. Lord Wavel said:- "He (Founder of Pakistan) is not only honest but he is intellectually honest."

9. It is imperative to put the nation on right path and, therefore, follow the basic character of the founder of Pakistan for the purpose of strengthening the country and to remove all excessive and colourable exercise in each and every sphere of activity of the Government official.

10. Now I intend to discuss the role of bureaucracy in the light of historical background of creation pf Pakistan.

11. It will be germane to have a bird's eye view of the genesis of the police. The machinery of Bureaucratic set up in the form of a civil service was created and designed for perpetuating foreign imperial power and not-to cater the needs and value of the people of this sub-continent. In view of this, the civil service acted only for the benefit of the imperial power in an imperial manner as if they were the direct representatives of the rulers. This approach was not a democratic approach to meet the legitimate needs of the people. At that time it also suited the imperial power while not allowing individuals rights to enter the imperial supremacy and to maintain law and order so that they could rule without any rebellion. At that time following two types of rights were recognized:-- (1) Individual rights qua other citizens (between citizens versus citizens). (2) Individual rights qua imperial power (struggle for freedom).

12. The imperial power had no interest and respect for the individuals as compared to their own vested interest. The police force was duty bound to investigate the matter honestly, fairly and justly so that truth must be brought to light. Therefore, the findings of the police were always respected and the Courts seldom interfere in the sphere of the jurisdiction of the police authority. In case of the freedom fighter the Investigating Agency, under the system investigated the matter in the interest of the imperial ruler and the findings of the Investigating Agency were respected by the Courts as the imperial power had not given total independence to the Judiciary. The Courts always respected the findings of the police and did not interfere as the Courts had no jurisdiction to disturb the finding of the police agency. Therefore, at that time the police functionary's findings were considered to be absolutely based on truth and Courts never interfered in the area of their jurisdiction. Gradually investigation of police came under the influence of politicians as was taken note of by the then Chief Justice Mr. Justice Khan Khalil-ur-Rehman Khan in Muhammad Anwar's case supra. Even in those days, there was some possibility that police officials had taken action based on mala fide or in violation of law, the Honourable Privy Council opened a narrow way to interfere where the action of the police was not in accordance with law.

13. This situation has now changed after independence. The responsibility of maintenance of law and order has developed on the newly established and elected Government of the people who should not have imperial designs for maintenance of peace for their survival as was the necessity of the imperial prior to 1947.

14. The relevant sections of the Criminal Procedure Code dealing with the duties and obligations regarding investigations are as follows:-- Section 4. (1) Defines the words investigation. Section

160. Deals with attendance of witnesses. Section

161. Deals with powers of police to examine any person during investigation. Section

157. Deals with sending the F.I.R. to the Magistrate.

15. Taking guidance from the aforementioned Articles of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Provisions of Law treatise and case-law I proceed to determine duties and obligations of the police department and the jurisdiction of this Court qua the inaction of the Police Department in performance of duties.

16. The word "Investigation" has been defined in section 4(l) of Criminal Procedure Code to include all the proceedings under the Code for collection of evidence conducted by a Police Officer. Collection of evidence cannot be confined only to such evidence which only favours the prosecution. Powers of Police Officer under section 160, Cr.P.C. are only to the extent to require attendance of witnesses in the course of investigation, which does not make any distinction either between the witnesses in favour of the prosecution and the defence. Police Officer conducting investigation can examine any person under section 161, Cr.P..C. who is supposed to be acquainted with facts and circumstances. Therefore, keeping in view the contents of section 160, 161 and 163, law does not make any distinction in the matter of recording statements made in favour of the accused or the prosecution in the course of investigation.

17. The duty of the Investigating Officer is not only to set up a case of complainant party with such type of evidence as may enable the Court to record conviction by all means, but also to bring out the truth on the surface to reach to a just decision. In other words, the purpose of investigation is to find out the truth and to present the same before the Court by way of admissible and acceptable evidence as it is undertaken to protect the innocent and never to let the guilty escape because of carelessness, excess of zeal or negligence 'of the police officials/officers.

18. Under section 157 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the Investigating Agency is under a mandate to send the F.I.R. immediately to the concerned Magistrate. This provision has been made to put effective check on investigation. Even otherwise the statement under section 161 recorded just after the F.I.R., is the only material, being the earliest, to check the veracity of the prosecution witnesses In case this material becomes doubtful on the ground that it was deliberately made perfunctory or dishonestly it loses much of its value and brings us in the area where possibility of injustice is hundred per cent. This necessitates careful accuracy of the record prepared by the Investigating Officer. Constant vigilance on the part of the investigator, to be trained and to be accurate is, all the more necessary in under developing countries. These provisions provide mechanism of check and balance so that just, fair and impartial investigation is conducted within the framework of the aforesaid provisions and also without fear and favour from political/and foreign elements, or without nepotism and favouritism. If the investigation is not conducted in this manner the subsequent proceedings, based on such findings, are bound to fall on the ground automatically.

19. Thus, under the Code, Investigation consists generally the following steps: (1) Proceeding to the spot, (2) Ascertainment of the facts and circumstances of the case, (3) Discovery and arrest of the suspected offender, (4) Collection of evidence relating to the commission of the offence which may consist of (a) examination of various persons (including the accused) and the reduction of their statements into writing, if the officer thinks fit, (b) the search of places or seizure of things considered necessary for the investigation and to be produced at the trial, and (5) Formation of the opinion as to whether on the material collected there is a case to place the accused before a Magistrate for trial, and if so, taking the necessary steps for the same by the filing of a charge sheet under section

173. From the scheme of the Code it is apparent that while it is permissible for an Officer Incharge of a Police Station to depute some subordinate Officer to conduct some of these steps in the investigation, the responsibility for every one of these steps is that of Officer Incharge of the Police Station it having been clearly provided in section 168 that when a subordinate officer makes an investigation he should report the result to the Officer Incharge of the Police Station. It is also clear that the final step in the investigation, viz. the formation of the opinion as to whether or not there is a case to place the accused on trial is to be that of the Officer Incharge of the police station. There is no provision permitting delegation thereof but only a provision entitling superior Officers to supervise or participate under section 551.

20. The basic duty of the police is to keep law and order situation in the country in order. It is only possible if the offender is convicted and sentenced to a shortest possible time. This purpose can be achieved when the Investigating Agency/Police perform its duties diligently, fairly and justly.

21. In the present case it is admitted fact that the petitioner lodged the', F.1.R. which was duly recorded by the respondent but the respondents failed to investigate the case honestly, fairly and justly. The police arrested Mazhari who confessed that he committed the theft and took away the vehicle alongwith his', co-accused and sold the same to Farooq Ahmad. The circumstances reveal that the police did not investigate and discharge its duties and obligation.) in accordance with the aforesaid principles and the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court.

22. From the resume of above said Text Books and case-law it is clear that Government of the day is also under obligation to enact laws keeping in view the situation prevailing in the country for the welfare of the people of the country who are the real soverign of the country. Similarly it is the duty and obligation of the Courts to decide the controversy between the parties by promoting the rule of law and to punish or acquit the offender on the basis of the evidence produced before the Court. It is primary duty of the police to collect the evidence as and when the matter is reported to the police. Investigation must be conducted by an honest person highly qualified for the job because on his finding and collection of the evidence the offender has to be convicted or acquitted. Therefore, the competent authority should divide the police force into following four branches for separately dealing the:-- (i) Maintenance of law and order. (ii) Investigation of Crime (iii) Protocol affairs. (iv) Intelligence duty. For the purpose of proper administration it should be the duty of the Incharge of a Police Station to send his monthly reports to the S.P. with regard to following cases fled in the Court in respect his Police Station:-- (1) Harassment. (2) Quashment of F.I.Rs. (3) Registration of cases. Thereafter, the S.P. concerned will be in a position to analyse the conduct and progress of the police station. It is also suggested that remarks regarding the efficiency determined on the basis of monthly reports must be recorded in the A.C.R. of the Incharge Police Station.

23. It is a common practice now-a-days that an offence pertaining to snatching cars is committed in Punjab and subsequently the vehicle is shifted to other Provinces. The Constitution in this regard has provided a scheme but police officials are not handling the matter in accordance with the Constitutional provisions i.e. Articles 246-247 in cases where the vehicles were taken to the tribal area. Similarly in case of stolen vehicles, which are taken to another Province, an effective liaison be established at the level of respective Inspector -General's; thus, ensuing requisite assistance to the concerned Investigating Officer. For a good and stable Government it is necessary that salaries of the Police Officer/officials should be increased qua their powers of duty to achieve the real goal of maintaining Law and order situation in the country, coupled with Constitutional guarantee to avoid the foreign pressure regarding discharge of their statute duties. 24 The above-mentioned proposals/suggestions are the need of the day. Let a copy of the decision be sent to Inspector-General Police, Chief Secretary, Home Secretary, Interior Secretary and Secretary Justice and Law Division, for consideration and necessary action. In the end I must put on record my deep sense of appreciation for the valuable assistance rendered to the Court by learned counsel for the rival parties. H.B.T./A-20/L Order accordingly.