PCRLJ 1989

1989 P Cr (PLP)

Haji IMAM DIN‑‑Petitioner. Versus S.H.O. and 4 others‑‑Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 167/H of 1989/BWP, decided on 5th July, 1989.
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Munir Khan, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1989 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Muhammad Munir Khan, J
Parties Haji IMAM DIN‑‑Petitioner. Versus S.H.O. and 4 others‑‑Respondents
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 P Cr (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 P Cr (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Munir Khan, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 P Cr (PLP) (Haji IMAM DIN‑‑Petitioner. Versus S.H.O. and 4 others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Representation

  • Nemo for Appellant.

Headnotes / Summary

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898).‑ ‑‑‑Ss. 25, 22‑A, 54 & 561‑A‑‑Powers.of a Judge of High Court for the registration of case and simultaneously arrest of the persons. Under section 25 read with section 22‑A of Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 a Judge of the High Court by virtue of his office, for the purpose of arrest can exercise all powers of a Police Officer referred to in section 54, Cr.P.C. not only within the local limits of the High Court concerned but in whole of Pakistan and at the time of giving order for the registration of the case can simultaneously arrest the persons who have been concerned in a cognizable offence or against whom a reasonable suspicion exists of their having been so concerned. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ ‑‑‑S. 491‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.342, 354, 457 & 365‑‑Habeas corpus‑ Alleged detenues during course of hearing levelled allegations of abduction and rape against police official and his companions‑‑Detenues were neither required by the police in any case nor any' warrant for their arrest was issued by the Magistrate‑‑Superintendent of Police directed by the High Court to register case or get the case registered against said Police official and his companions under Ss. 342, 354, 457, 365, P.P.C. and under Ss.10 & 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 and to depute responsible Officer not below the rank of D.S.P. to investigate the case. Respondents in person.

Judgment & Decree

Under section 25 read with section 22‑A of Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 a Judge of the High Court by virtue of his office, for the purpose of arrest can exercise all powers of a Police Officer referred to in section 54, Cr.P.C. not only within the local limits of the High Court concerned but in whole of Pakistan and at the time of giving order for the registration of the case can simultaneously arrest the persons who have been concerned in a cognizable offence or against whom a reasonable suspicion exists of their having been so concerned. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ ‑‑‑S. 491‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.342, 354, 457 & 365‑‑Habeas corpus‑ Alleged detenues during course of hearing levelled allegations of abduction and rape against police official and his companions‑‑Detenues were neither required by the police in any case nor any' warrant for their arrest was issued by the Magistrate‑‑Superintendent of Police directed by the High Court to register case or get the case registered against said Police official and his companions under Ss. 342, 354, 457, 365, P.P.C. and under Ss.10 & 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 and to depute responsible Officer not below the rank of D.S.P. to investigate the case. Nemo for Appellant. Respondents in person. In the course of the hearing of this petition, Mst. Shahida and Mst. Sughran, the alleged detenues, levelled allegations of abduction and rape against Abdul Rashid A.S.I. and his companions vide order dated 25‑6‑1989, 1 directed S.S.P. Multan, to hold preliminary investigation. The report submitted by the S.S.P. confirms that Mst. Sughran and Mst. Shahida after having been apprehended by Abdul Rashid A.S.I. and the constables accompanying him, were . brought to Police Station City Lodhran and were wrongfully kept there, but were not subjected to sexual intercourse or other act of immorality. It is very much H obvious that although Mst. Shahida and Mst. Sughran were not required by the police in any case nor any warrant for their arrest was issued by the Magistrate, yet Abdul Rashid A.S.I. and his companions namely Muhammad Naseeb, F. C. Muhammad Amin, F.C. and Allah Bakhsh Razakar, by force compelled them to go from their house situate in village Klanchwala, District Bahawalpur, to Lodhran, District Multan and thereafter wrongfully confined them in Police Station City Lodhran. This shows that the aforesaid police officials and Razakar have been concerned in a cognizable offence punishable under section 365, P.P.C. or at least a reasonable suspicion exists of their having been so concerned. It is a case of high handedness. I feel that a situation has arisen in which for the effective administration of justice and administration of law I may exercise my authority under section 25 read with section 22‑A, Cr.P.C. and inherent powers of High Court under section 561‑A, Cr.P.C. Under section 25 read with section 22‑A a Judge of the High Court by virtue of his office, for the purpose of arrest can exercise all powers of a Police Officer referred to in section 54, Cr.P.C. not only within the local limits of the High Court concerned but in whole of Pakistan and '3 at the time of giving order for the registration of the case can simultaneously arrest the persons who have been concerned in a cognizable offence or against whom a reasonable suspicion exists of their having been so concerned. I propose to arrest Abdul Rashid A.S.I. Muhammad Naseeb, F.C. Muhammad Amin, F.C. and Allah Bakhsh, Razakar and get the case registered on the report of the S.S.P. At this stage, the petitioner has expressed his dissatisfaction with the report of S.S.P. Multan. He insists that the modesty of Mst. Shahida was outraged by Abid Hussain Shah and Mst. Sughran was raped by Zafar Hussain Shah with the connivance of Abdul Rashid A.S.I. and Iqbal Hussain Shah. He wants case to be registered on his report and not on the report of S.S.P. That being the position, I refrain from getting the case registered under section 365, P.P.C. and also from taking Abdul Rashid A.S.I. and others into custody, lest it may prejudice the intended F.I.R. of the petitioner and the investigation of the case. S.P. Bahawalpur, enjoys powers of an Officer in charge of police station throughout the local area of District Bahawalpur, therefore, I direct him to register or get the case registered under sections 342, 354, 457, 365, P.P.C. and sections 11 and 10 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979 at Police Station Naushera Jadeed, on the basis of complaint marked `A' of the detenues. He will depute responsible officer not below the rank of D.S.P. to investigate the case. He will get the investigation complete within 15 days under intimation to the Additional Registrar of this Court. M.A.K/I‑133/1, Order accordingly.