2003 P Cr (PLP)

Tariq Zulfiqar Ahmad Chaudhry for Respondents. Muhammad Sarwar Bhatti, A.A.‑G. for the State. Date of hearing: 19th February, 2003. Through this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, petitioners seek quashment of case F.I.R., No.9, dated 8‑1‑1998 registered under sections 337‑F(i)(v)/337‑A(i)/337‑H(ii)/427/148/149, P.P.C. at Police Station Gaggu, District Vehari on the statement of Muhammad Rafiq.

2. The brief allegation against the petitioners in the F.I.R. is that they while armed with Sotas came to the house of the complainant and caused injuries to the P.Ws., some of which are serious in nature.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that earlier F.I.R. No. 179 was also registered on the statement of Rehmat Ali under sections 454/380/427/34, P.P.C. for the same occurrence. It is also contended that the petitioners were declared innocent by two Investigating Officers and thus, the second F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.

4. Learned Assistant Advocate‑General and learned counsel for the complainant oppose this petition on the ground that F.I.R. cannot be quashed without the thorough investigation/probe and no decision can be given without recording the evidence of witnesses.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the contents of the F.I.R. As F.I.R. No. 179 has been cancelled due to the registration of this F.I.R., hence, this ground for the quashment of the F. I. R. is not available to the petitioners. As far as the contention that the petitioners were declared innocent by the police during the investigation is concerned, the police opinion is neither binding on the Courts nor on the basis of the same F.I.R. can be quashed. I have noticed that the Investigating Officer has failed to conclude the investigation in spite of the fact that investigation was not stayed in this case but only petitioners were directed not to be illegally harassed. However, they were directed to join the investigation. No ground is made out for the quashment of the F.I.R. and this petition is dismissed. However, the District Police Officer, Vehari is directed to entrust the investigation of the above‑said F.I.R. (F. I. R. No. 9 of 1998) to any Police Officer not below the rank of Inspector, who shall conclude the same within a fortnight after joining both the parties. Learned Assistant Advocate‑General shall contact the D.P.O. Vehari and, convey him the directions of this Court for compliance. H.B.T./N‑342/L Petition dismissed.