' SYED SHABBAR RAZA RIZVI, J.---The facts leading to filing Writ Petition No,12215 of 2004 and the present Intra-Court Appeal are that the appellant is a complainant in case F.I.R. No,665 of 2003, dated 25-10-2003. The said F.I.R. Was registered under sections 324,337-H(ii), 148, 149 and 109, P.P.C.
At Police Station Nawankot, Lahore against 12 persons. Initially, investigation was conducted by A.S.- I. Muhammad Majeed who declared two accused to be innocent and sent the file to the DSP for the verification. The said DSP further declared eight accused innocent and four accused guilty.
Aggrieved by the said finding, the appellant moved an application on 10-12-2003 to SSP Investigation, Lahore for transfer of the investigation. On the Board's recommendation the investigation was transferred to DSP (Investigation), Kot Lakhpat, Lahore. The said DSP declared all 12 accused persons guilty vide his.Finding dated 4-4-2004 and directed Incharge Investigation to submit the challan accordingly. The Incharge Investigation did not comply with the findings of the DSP instead directed Muhammad Riaz, S.I., to re-investigate the case. The petitioner moved another application to CCPO, Lahore who entrusted the application to SP Investigation Saddar. The SP Investigation Saddar, respondent No,2 himself started the re-investigation of the case instead of holding inquiry on application of the petitioner. In the above circumstances, the appellant filed Writ Petition No,12215 of 2004 which was disposed of by the Hon'ble Single Bench who vide his order dated 14-2-2005 entrusted the investigation of the two accused to respondent No,2 directing him to complete the investigation within three weeks and file supplementary report in accordance with law. The said order of the learned Single Bench has been impugned in the present I.C.A. Mainly on the ground that the order is not consistent with the provisions of Article 18(6) of Police Order, 2002.
2. The impugned order of the learned Single Bench shows that respondent No,2 was entrusted verification of the investigation to the extent of two accused namely, Malik Arif and Malik laved lqbal with the approval of the learned counsel for the appellant (then petitioner). The relevant lines read as under:- "The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he would have no objection if Imran Mehmood, SP Saddar (Investigation) Lahore is asked to verify the investigation and form an independent opinion to their extent only."
3. However, despite the consent of the learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner in the above order, in our opinion, that order could not have been passed in the above terms. On "subject of verification of investigation", this Court has already passed a judgment reported as "Aziz Ahmad v.
Provincial Police Office (IGP Lahore) PLD 2005 Lah.
185. The Provincial Police Officer/IGP, Punjab had passed a circular known as Circular No,1 of 2002, whereby senior police officers were authorized to direct police officers to verify the investigations.
While verifying the investigations, verifying police officers were allowed to form and give their independent findings which could be different from the findings of the original Investigating Officers. This Court found the said practice as illegal, inconsistent and violative of Article 18(6) of the Police Order, 2002. The Court held as under:-- "As I have already observed, the impugned Circular No,1 of 2002 cannot even be treated as a rule then how can it be allowed to exist when it is clearly inconsistent, contravenes and frustrates the objective mentioned under Article 18(6) of the Police Order, 2002? The spirit of Article 18(6) of the Police Order, 2002, is to discourage re-investigations. That is why reinvestigation has been made difficult, and a clear procedure has been provided. The said objective cannot be bypassed or stultify by using device i.e, verification of investigation, etc. In view of my above findings, Circular No,1 of 2002, dated 5-11-2002, is hereby declared as void, illegal, without lawful jurisdiction and of no legal effect."
4. In the recent Full Bench judgment reported as Khizar Hayat v. IGP, PLD 2005 Lahore 470, the point of "verification" was discussed. The Court held, "in any case, if an investigation by an Investigating Officer is to be verified by some other officer, then such verification must be confined to verification of the record of investigation and such an exercise cannot be allowed to be conducted in a manner giving it a colour of fresh investigation with fresh conclusion. Verifying Officer has to confine himself to the record of investigation already conducted and cannot substitute his own conclusion for those of the Investigating Officer and if he finds any serious fault with the investigation already conducted, then Verifying Officer can bring such fault to the notice of Superintendent of Police (Investigation) of the concerned district, who can then initiate the process as contemplated by the provisions of Article 18(6) of the Police Order, 2002 for change of investigation".
5. The learned Single Bench directed SP Saddar (Investigation) to verify investigation and then form an independent opinion to the extent of the above mentioned two accused i.e, Malik Arif son of Haji Ali and Malik Javed Iqbal son of Muhammad Din. The Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court has categorically held that Verifying Officer cannot form his own opinion or substitute his opinion for the Investigating Officer. In case, he finds a fault with the opinion of the Investigating Officer, he can refer the matter to the SP Investigation of the concerned district who can then initiate the process as contemplated by provisions of Article 18(6) of the Police Order, 2002, for change of investigation.
Therefore, in view of the above, we respectfully disagree with the learned Single Bench and hold impugned order inconsistent with the decision of Hon'ble Full Bench referred to above. At this point, another reference would be relevant from the Full Bench judgment, the Court I held as under:-- "The case-law referred to by us hereinbelow would show that even the Superior Courts of Pakistan having constitutional, legal, supervisory and inherent judicial jurisdiction have consistently and consciously refrained from directly interfering with investigation of a criminal case by the police and, therefore, it is but obvious that Justice of Peace or ex officio Justices of Peace possessing only administrative and ministerial powers should be twice shy of such direct interference." (PLD 2005 Lahore 470).
6. It may be pointed out that DSP, Kot Lakhpat (Investigation) was entrusted investigation on recommendation of the Board as provided under Article 18(6) of the Police Order, 2002. He gave his findings on 4-4-2004. All subsequent investigations or proceedings are declared illegal and without any legal effect as they were not conducted as contemplated in Article 18(6) of the Police Order, 2002. The concerned authorities are directed to submit challan according to the findings of the said DSP before the competent Court. The appeal is allowed in the above terms.