1999 PLP 1445 (MLD)

Writ Petition No. 16164 of 1998, decided on 11th August, 1998.

Art.199

Constitutional petition

Detention of complainant by Investigating Officer

Investigating Officer on having found the case got registered by the complainant to be baseless was duty bound to have made a report to the Court concerned about his conclusion and sought for discharge of the accused whereafter action against the complainant could be taken

Procedure adopted by the Investigating Officer by arresting the complainant during investigation of his case was totally unwarranted being not in consonance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure

Magistrate while giving remand of the complainant to the Police had also not applied his mind to the facts of the case-- Complainant (detenu) was, consequently, directed to be released forthwith-- Constitutional petition was accepted accordingly. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 10-8-1998 the bailiff has submitted his report, the crux of which is that the detenu was found locked the C.I.A. Police officials and that as per police official Ghulam Rasool, Sub-Inspector respondent No.3, he was arrested for the reason that he had produced certain forged document during the investigation of case F.I.R. No.53 of 1998 of which he was a complainant.

2. Ch. Abdur Rasheed; Advocate has tendered his power of attorney just now on behalf of respondent No.4. 9e stated that the act of the police official was justified and he had obtained physical remand of the detenu till today:

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that all this was illegal. He tendered certified copy of the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore in relation to petition for cancellation of bail allowed to respondent No.4 and her absconding husband wherein it was directed that the investigation of this case will not be conducted by Ghulam Rasool, Sub-Inspector, respondent No.3 here and it should be done by a D.S.P. Learned counsel further stated that the learned Additional Sessions Judge made certain observation about the conduct of the police official and stated that there was a clear collusion between tire police and the main beneficiary of the forgery."

4. After going through the order of learned Additional Sessions Judge coupled with the fact that it was the duty of the Police Official investigating the case F.I.R. No.53 of 1998 of which the detenu was a complainant, that if he had found the case to be baseless, he should have made a report to the Court concerned about conclusion and sought for discharge of the accused whereafter action against the complainant could be taken.

5. The Police Official manifestly has not adopted the correct procedure and has not acted in consonance with the Code of Criminal Procedure by arresting the complainant of the case F.I.R. No.53 of 1998 during the investigation and it also appears that the learned Magistrate giving remand also did not apply his mind to the facts of this case. Nonetheless, tile remand is over today and as observed earlier the procedure adopted by the Police Official respondent No.3 was totally unwarranted, therefore, the petition is accepted and the detenu released. The detenu is at liberty to take action available under the law, if he so wanted, on account of this detention. N.H.Q./K-69/L Petition accepted.