' M. BILAL KHAN, J.---Muhammad Ramzan son of Qasim Ali, the petitioner, filed this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, wherein it was stated that his real brother, namely, Abdul Rashid alias Gunga, had been abducted by Malik Amanat Ali, S.-I. And Abdul Rashid, A.S.-I., respondents Nos.3 and 4, respectively, on 4-4-2002 and that thereafter he was subjected to severe physical torture as a result of which he lost his life and accordingly a prayer was made that S.H.O. (respondent No.2) be directed to register a case against the said respondents under sections 201, 302, 365 and 34, P.P.C.
2. During the course of hearing of this writ petition, it transpired that the petitioner Muhammad Ramzan had died, whereupon his legal heirs, namely, Mst. Hajran Bibi, mother, Ghulam Nabi, brother, and Mst. Naseem Mai, sister, had been impleaded as petitioners by an amended writ petition.
3. It has been argued by Mr. Arif Chaudhry, the learned counsel for the petitioners that Abdul Rashid alias Gunga had been remanded to judicial custody in various cases bearing F.I.R. Nos.488/2001, 43/2002 and 64 of 2002 registered at Police Station A-Division, Okara, F.I.R. No.122 of 2002 registered at Police Station B-Division, Okara, and F.I.R. No.256 of 2002, registered at Police Station Saddar Okara, whereas his physical remand had been given to the police in F.I.R. No.301 of 2002, registered at Police Station, Saddar Okara; that after obtaining physical remand, Abdul Rashid had been brutally tortured by respondents Nos.3 and 4 in the presence of Muhammad Ramzan, the original writ petitioner, and that later on he was murdered in the intervening night of 25/26-4-2002 and his dead body had been removed so as to eliminate the evidence; that later on a F.I.R. Had been chalked out at Police Station, Saddar Okara, wherein a false story was introduced that Abdul Rashid had escaped from the police custody; that the injuries observed by the doctor, who conducted post-mortem examination, are also suggestive of the fact that the deceased had been subjected to police torture. Finally it was argued that since the S.H.O. And the District Police Officer have failed to perform their statutory duties by registering a case, writ of mandamus may be issued for the requisite relief.
4. On the other hand, Mr. Muhammad Ahsan Bhoon, the learned counsel fOr respondents Nos.3 and 4 submitted that Abdul Rashid alias Gunga had been arrested in case F.I.R. No.301 of 2002, registered at Police Station, Saddar, Okara for an offence under section 380-A, P.P.C. And remained on physical remand with the police for fourteen days and during the course of investigation nine stolen motorcycles had been recovered from him; that in the night intervening 25/26-4-2002, he managed to escape from the lock-up, as a result of which F.I.R. No.295 of 2002, dated 26-4-2002, under sections 223/224, P.P.C. Had been lodged against him; that during the course of his abscondence, a case F.I.R. No. 149 of 2002, dated 21-7-2002 had been registered at Police Station, Mailsi, District Vehari for offences under sections 324/353/186, P.P.C., wherein he was nominated as an accused person; that said Abdul Rashid died as a result of fall in Rohi Nullah and the circumstances in which he had fallen in the said Nullah resulting in his death are mentioned in detail in F.I.R. No.430 of 2002, dated 26-8-2002, registered at Police Station, Manga Mandi, for offences under sections 324/353/186, P.P.C. Read with section 7 of Surrender of Illicit Arms Act, 1991; that allegation of the petitioners that Abdul Rashid had been done to death in the night intervening 25/26-4-2002 is thus negated by the aforesaid F.I.R. No.430 of 2002 and that the post-mortem examination of said Abdul Rashid alias Gunga, which was carried out on 30-8-2002 also states that his death had occurred three to four days before the said examination. The learned counsel also argued that Abdul Rashid deceased had been involved in as many as twenty three criminal cases registered at various police stations including Saddar, A-Division, B-Division, Okara, City Mailsi, Manga Mandi, Batala Colony, Faisalabad etc., likewise his brother Muhammad Siddique was involved in sixteen cases; Muhammad Ramzan, the original writ petitioner was involved in twenty eight cases and that the said lists were by no means exhaustive. He finally argued that the case is being sought to be registered against the police officials only with a view to deterring them to pursue the criminal cases against the family of the petitioners.
5. I have carefully examined the respective contentions of the learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have also gone through the record available on the file.
6. I would not like to comment on the veracity of the allegations levelled by the writ petitioners and the counter-allegations brought by the respondents, inasmuch as, unmistakably in order to appreciate their respective contentions, a factual inquiry is to be conducted which exercise cannot be undertaken by this Court while exercising its constitutional jurisdiction. In view of the conflicting claims made by the parties, I am not inclined to order registration of a case especially when more than three years have elapsed and the petitioners themselves are responsible to a large extent in the delay which has been caused in the disposal of this writ petition. Even otherwise, according to the petitioners themselves the police are trying to shield and protect their officials and in this scenario no useful purpose would be served in ordering registration of a case. However, the petitioners are not left without an alternate remedy. They may, if so advised, file a private complaint.
7. Resultantly, this petition is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.