1988 P Cr (PLP)

It is further prayed that an appropriate action in the shape of registration of a case may kindly be directed against Muhammad Akram Cheema Inspector S.H.O, Ghulam Hussain Sub‑Inspector and Rana Muhammad Bashir A.S.I, Police Station Misri Shah, Lahore". Before discussing the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner it is necessary to mention the background of the criminal case registered against the petitioner and his family. On 15‑8‑1987, petitioner's better half expired leaving behind 6 children, three daughters and three sons. She was buried in Ghore Shah graveyard, which is under the management of Auqaf Department. The petitioner alongwith his children used to go to the graveyard for reciting the Holy Quran. One day when he and his children went to the graveyard they found the grave in a very bad condition, Children of the locality were playing in the graveyard and it so appeared that they had damaged the grave. The petitioner accordingly approached the parents of the children in the locality in order to inform them about the damage done to his wife's grave. Again or 19‑8‑1987 the petitioner alongwith his daughter who is a student of M.A. went to the graveyard. There they saw that the grave had been demolished. The petitioner and his daughter noticed about 6 persons, male as well as female, standing near the grave. The petitioner asked them what they had done to the grave. This resulted in altercation and exchange of hot words between the petitioner and those present. Petitioner was beaten. So, was his young daughter. The petitioner went to the Police Station Misri shah, so that he could lodge a report about what had happened to him and his daughter. The Moharrar present in the Police Station asked the petitioner to wait for the Inspector. After sometime the Inspector (respondent No‑2) arrived. The petitioner narrated the entire incident to him. The Inspector asked the Advocate to write down the complaint. This was done. The complaint was handed over to the Moharrar. The Inspector directed the Moharrar to register an F.I.R. While this was going on Ghulam Hussain S.I. brought four persons from the spot. Then the Inspector received a telephonic call. All of a sudden every thing stopped. A DSP known as Pehalwan came to the Police Station. He was accompanied by a few persons. The D.S.P. took aside the Inspector, had some conversation with him as a result of which the attitude of the Inspector completely changed and the petitioner was told by respondent No.2 to apologise to the persons against whom he had filed the complaint. The petitioner refused to do so as he was not at fault. The Inspector used filthy language against the petitioner. He was slapped and was told that he was a third class person being a lawyer and that he would be taught a lesson. The daughter of the petitioner was taken aback. She asked the Police Inspector as to what had happened. She too was abused, given beating and her shirt and Dopatta were torn. She was handed over to another constable, who also save beating to her. In the meanwhile son of the petitioner turned up at the Police Station. He was also humiliated. According to the petitioner he, his daughter and son were actually beaten. Medico‑legal reports have been attached. Matter did not end here. Case was registered under sections 354/452/506, P.P.C. by respondent No.2 against the petitioner, his son and daughter. All the three were locked‑up. The arrest was not shown. Although this happened on 19‑8‑1987 but it was on the following day that an entry was made in the relevant record. Thereafter, the Inspector took the petitioner and his children in handcuffs from place to place on the pretext that they were to be remanded to the police custody. This entire exercise was to publicly disgrace the petitioner and his family. Ultimately they were locked up in a small room at Misri Shah Police Station. It was on 22‑8‑1987 that the petitioner and his family members were admitted to interim bail. When he came out, he brought this to the notice of the Bar Association which approached the SSP but nothing happened. Instead the petitioner was falsely involved in murder case of Hafiz Muhammad Bilal. This was done at the instance of respondent No.2 through Muhammad Hanif Waraich, S.H.O. Police Station Yakki Gate. Learned counsel appearing in support of this petition contended that the petitioner is not only a law abiding citizen but he is also an Advocate. Police instead of helping him falsely involved him in criminal cases. He and his two children were publicly disgraced. This was done because the Inspector had received some secret order from some quarter in favour of those who as a matter of fact had to be proceeded against. Learned counsel further submitted that it is in the interest of justice that the case registered against the petitioner be cancelled. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State contended that the challan had been submitted but it has been returned with some objections. Counsel for the petitioner did not address the Court with regard to the second prayer. I have also heard the Inspector. He submitted that in the alleged incident judicial enquiry was held by Abdul Haq Magistrate. He was exonerated in this enquiry. According to the Inspector, F.I.R. was not mala fide. It was genuine. He further submitted that he had no animus against the petitioner and did not falsely implicate him in any murder case. Inspector further submitted that the matter was duly taken note of by the higher Authorities and had he been at fault he would not have been spared. Before proceeding further I would like to observe that the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the enquiry was boycotted by the lawyers because respondent No.2 was neither suspended nor transferred. Before, I have no reason to disbelieve the petitioner. He was emotionally upset with regard to the sad demise of his better half. He was hurt when he saw the condition of the grave of his wife. In a situation like this it cannot be ruled out that he might have exchanged some hot words with the persons present in the graveyard or living nearby. But I do not think he had any criminal intention. I am disappointed to note that the custodians of law who are expected to behave in a more decent and civilized way acted in a very rude manner and went to the extent of disgracing an Advocate and his family. If the Police Inspector would have acted in a decent way realising the gravity of the situation and the fact that 'the petitioner was genuinely aggrieved about the loss of his wife, I do not think the matter would have taken such an ugly turn. No doubt, no evidence so far has been recorded but even at this stage this Court has the necessary jurisdiction to pass an order in the interest of justice. So after taking all the relevant facts into consideration, I am of the view that it is a fit case where F.I.R. must be quashed. Otherwise it would be a mock trial and abuse of process of Court. I, therefore, order accordingly. With regard to the second prayer, the D.I.‑G. Lahore is directed to summon the parties, give them a patient hearing, examine the matter himself and act in accordance with law. Criminal Miscellaneous.782/M of 1987 and 952/M of 1987 stand disposed of. S.G.D./M‑741/L????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition accepted.