2010 PLP 2066 (YLR)
Malik MUHAMMAD KHAN — Petitioner Versus INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE PUNJAB, and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2010 PLP 2066 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Ch. Mahmood Akhtar Khan, J |
| Parties | Malik MUHAMMAD KHAN — Petitioner Versus INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE PUNJAB, and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Police Order (22 of 2002) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 PLP 2066 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Police Order (22 of 2002) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 PLP 2066 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Ch. Mahmood Akhtar Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2010 PLP 2066 (YLR) (Malik MUHAMMAD KHAN — Petitioner Versus INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE PUNJAB, and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Qaiser Imran for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Art. 18(6)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.489-F
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199
Constitutional petition
Suspension of arrest of accused
Record had shown that impugned order for suspension of arrest of respondent/accused, was issued by the police functionary without having lawful authority, as investigation of the case had never been entrusted to said functionary under Art.18(6) of Police Order, 2002
Impugned order passed by police functionary was set aside and Investigating Officer was directed to investigate the case purely on merit. Muhammad Abid Raja, A.A.-G. Abdul Ghaffar A.S-I. with record.
Judgment & Decree
CH. MAHMOOD AKHTAR KHAN, J.
Case was registered vide F.I.R. No.356, dated 26-7-2008 for offence under section 489-F, P.P.C. against respondent No.6. He obtained pre-arrest bail from the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Rawalpindi and was on the same position when respondent No.3 issued impugned order dated 19-11-2008 that not to arrest respondent No.6 till the report of Handwriting Expert.
2. In the light of contention raised by learned counsel record has been perused with the assistance of learned A.A.-G. It transpired that respondent No.3 issued impugned order dated 19-11-2000 for suspension of arrest of the accused/ respondent No.6 without having lawful authority. As the investigation of the case never been entrusted to him by the Additional Inspector-General of Police under Article 18(6) of Police Order, 2002. Learned A.A.-G. also supported the contention raised by learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. In view of above situation, this writ petition is accepted. The impugned order dated 19-11-2008 passed by respondent No.3 is hereby set aside and the Investigating Officer is directed to investigate the case purely on merit. H.B.T./M-269/L Petition accepted.