2002 PLP 1898 (MLD)
GHULAM MUHAMMAD SHALGIRI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus S.H.O., SHAHDADKOT and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 2002 PLP 1898 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Wahid Bux Brohi, J |
| Parties | GHULAM MUHAMMAD SHALGIRI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus S.H.O., SHAHDADKOT and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 1898 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 PLP 1898 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Wahid Bux Brohi, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 1898 (MLD) (GHULAM MUHAMMAD SHALGIRI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus S.H.O., SHAHDADKOT and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Ayaz Soomro for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 23rd April, 2002
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.1S.4‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199 & 4‑‑‑Constitutional petition‑‑‑Registration of criminal case against police officials‑‑ Petitioner was father of accused who was arrested by police for offence under Ss.325 & 379, P.P.C. in a blind F.I.R. in which no culprit had been nominated‑‑‑Petitioner had alleged that while his son was in custody of police, police officials had severely beaten him and caused severe injuries on his head and other parts of his body and put lime powder and Naswar in his ears and mouth as a result of which his condition had become serious‑‑‑Petitioners had prayed that F.I.R. should be lodged against police officials responsible for action against his son‑‑‑Medical Officer after examining son of the petitioner certified injuries on the person of the son of petitioner which were caused during custody of police‑‑‑Said Medical Certificate was though an evidence of fact which spoke of some incident, but it was difficult for High Court to form an opinion about commission of the act by a particular person and hold him responsible for such criminal act‑‑‑Such a finding is to be rendered by Trial Court‑‑‑Petitioner, however, had inalienable right within meaning of Art.4 of Constitution of Pakistan (1973) to be dealt with in accordance with law and have his case registered within meaning of S.154, Cr.P.C. if cognizable offence was made out‑‑‑High Court directed that as and when petitioner appeared at concerned Police Station and made statement, same as to be recorded and F.I.R. registered. Imran Ashraf v. State 2001 SCMR 424 and Syed Saeed Ahmed Shah v. State 1993 SCMR 550 ref. Muhammad Bachal Tunio, Addl. A.‑G
Judgment & Decree
(2) Partially healed lacerated wound 1 1/2 cm. x 1/4 cm skin superficially on frontal region of skull left lateral to injury No. 1. (3) Two partially healed skin lacerations each 1 cm x 1/2 cm on back of right elbow joint positively. (4) Two infected skin lacerations each 1 cm x 1/2 cm on right lower side of abdomen. (5) Partially healed skin lacerations 2 cm x 2 cm on mid of posterior parietal region of skull. (6) C/O pain in left hand below the thumb on palm side. On the other hand, a copy of Medical Certificate issued by Medical Officer, Taluka Hospital, Shahdadkot, who examined Zahid Hussain on 12‑4‑2002 at 2‑40 p.m., has been placed on record which shows the following injuries:‑
(1) Abrasion 3x1 cm on the left side parietal region. (2) Abrasion 4x1 cm on the left side beside the first one. (3) Bruise 2x1 cm on the left upper arm. (4) Bruise 3x2 cm on the right knee joint. (5) Swelling 5x2 cm on the left hand. On a plain reading of these medical certificates, learned Additional Advocate‑General concedes that ex facie the nature of injuries is remarkably different. Present petition is verified on oath while Inspector Ahmed Ali Sodhar in his statement has denied the allegation. DSP Ali Muhammad, Shahani, respondent No.2 has filed a statement denying the allegations and has referred to the criminal cases in which Zahid Hussain was arrested. He has also referred to statement recorded under section 164, Cr.P.C. whereby the story of attempt to commit suicide by Zahid Hussain is said to have supported. Obviously; the injuries sustained by Zahid Hussain during custody of police are evidence of a fact which speaks of some incident. The petitioner has prayed that F.I.R. may be lodged against respondents Nos.1 to 3 and also proposed accused. It is difficult for this Court to form an opinion about act of a particular person and hold any of them responsible for any criminal act and such a finding is to be rendered by the trial Court. However, it is inalienable right of petitioner within the meaning of Article 4 of Constitution of Pakistan that he should be dealt with in accordance with law and the case be registered within the meaning of section 154, Cr.P.C. if a cognizable offence is made out. Reference be made to Imran Ashraf v. State (2001 SCMR 424) and Syed Saeed Ahmed Shah v. State (1993 SCMR 550) in this context. Accordingly, it is directed that as and when petitioner Ghulam Muhammad appears at concerned police station and makes a. statement the same may be recorded and F.I.R. be drawn. The D.P.O. should entrust the investigation of the case to an honest and trustworthy police officer to conduct the investigation impartially. The result of investigation may also be communicated to this Court. With the above observations, the petition stands disposed of. H.B.T/G‑106/K Petition disposed of.