1999 PLP 2237 (MLD)

A case under section 409, P.P.C. was registered at the report of Sub Divisional Officer, Electricity, WAPDA against the petitioner, an Audit Officer in the same department vide F.I.R. No.490 of 1998 lodged at Police Station. Baghbanpura, District Lahore for an occurrence which took place on 28-9-1998. It was contended in the F.I.R. that the petitioner tampered with the Revenue Record and also misappropriated Government money mentioned in the F.I.R.

2. The petitioner applied for pre-arrest bail in the Court of the learned Special Judge Anti-Corruption (Central), Lahore. A notice was issued in the aforesaid petition for 13-10-19,98 and meanwhile, the petitioner was admitted to interim pre-arrest bail in the sum of Rs.100,000 with one surety in the like amount. When the petition came up for hearing on 13-10-1998, the learned Special Judge (Central), Lahore made an order that since the petitioner was an employee of the Central government, therefore, the Investigating Officer (of local police) will hand over the record to the F.I.A. for investigation and to appear on the next date of hearing i.e. 28-10-1998. The interim bail was extended till then. In the meantime, the petitioner feeling aggrieved of the aforesaid order, filed the present writ petition on the ground that the learned Special Judge (Central), Lahore had no jurisdiction to transfer the investigation from local Police to the F.I.A. while hearing the petition for pre-arrest bail. In this connection reference was made to PLD 1996 Supreme Court 324 to contend that in the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the word used as "jurisdiction" denoted authority for the Courts to exercise the judicial power as such power is inherent in the superior Courts to interpret, construe and apply law as a result of system of division of powers.

3. Needless to say that the Constitutional jurisdiction mentioned therein is not relatable to the proposition in hand vis-a-vis the impugned order passed by the learned Special Judge. Likewise, the authority relied upon as 1986 PCr.LJ 2994 would not be applicable to the facts of the case as it dealt with the interpretation of statutes and dynamism of law applicable to the developing societies.

4. Now coming back to the facts of the case, it is to be seen whether or not the impugned order passed by the learned Special Judge (Central), Lahore directing the local Police to hand over the record for investigation to the concerned Police i.e. F.I.A. was within his jurisdiction. The trial of such cases is to be held under the Pakistan Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1958. The procedure contained in the Code of Criminal Pr6cedure, .1898 is applicable to proceedings in the cases in the aforesaid Court in view o f the provisions contained in sections 5 and 6 of the Act (supra). The subsection (6) of section 5 of the aforesaid Act empowers a Special Judge to order an investigation any police officer in whose jurisdiction, the offence was wholly or partly. A As such, the prosecution of the employees of the Central Government or it committed corporate bodies is to be conducted by the Federal Police i.e. F.LA. as such, the learned Special Judge (Central), Lahore did not commit an illegality in directing the .local police to transfer the record of the case to the F.I.A. for investigation and to produce the same on the next date of hearing fixed petition for pre-arrest bail.

5. In view of the foregoing facts, the order passed by the learned Special Judge (Central), Lahore does not suffer from any patent illegality so as to call 8 for interference in the writ jurisdiction of this Court. The petition being meritless is dismissed in limine. It shall, however, be open for the petitioner to raise this point at any appropriate Court stage before the learned trial Q.M.H./M.A.K./H-70/L Petition dismissed