ORDER The petitioner, Sakina Bibi filed this writ petition, whereby she has fought a direction for transfer of. Investigation of F.I.R. No. 110/05, dated 18.4.2005, under Section 9-C of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, at P.S. Barana, District-Jhang, out Of the District.
2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, her husband Zahoor Khan has been incorrectly and mala fidley involved in the above-mentioned F.I.R. The learned counsel further submits that one Akbar Ali Dogar, SHO had involved petitioner's husband falsely in another case. He adds that during the raid on 17/18.4.2005, respondent Noor Muhammad, AS1 and other police officials took- away Rs. 1,500/- from her house. The said police officials also arrested her husband and son, namely, Atta Hussain, who was released on the following day after receiving Rs. 30,000/-, but petitioner's husband was involved in the F.I.R. No. 110/05. The petitioner moved applications to respondent No. 2 and DIG, Faisalabad for transfer and fair investigation, but she was not provided relief. According to the learned counsel, respondent No. 6 is not legally authorized to conduct investigation in view of provisions of Article 18(4) of the Police Order, 2002. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under the Constitutional jurisdiction, this Court has sufficient powers to order entrustment of investigation of the Saideman from outside District Jhang.
2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, her husband Zahoor Khan has been incorrectly and mala fidley involved in the above-mentioned F.I.R. The learned counsel further submits that one Akbar Ali Dogar, SHO had involved petitioner's husband falsely in another case. He adds that during the raid on 17/18.4.2005, respondent Noor Muhammad, AS1 and other police officials took- away Rs. 1,500/- from her house. The said police officials also arrested her husband and son, namely, Atta Hussain, who was released on the following day after receiving Rs. 30,000/-, but petitioner's husband was involved in the F.I.R. No. 110/05. The petitioner moved applications to respondent No. 2 and DIG, Faisalabad for transfer and fair investigation, but she was not provided relief. According to the learned counsel, respondent No. 6 is not legally authorized to conduct investigation in view of provisions of Article 18(4) of the Police Order, 2002. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under the Constitutional jurisdiction, this Court has sufficient powers to order entrustment of investigation of the Saideman from outside District Jhang.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Since enforcement of the Police Order, 2002, a mechanism has been provided under the Police Order, 2002 for transfer of investigation. The petitioner has not availed the said remedy provided under the law before invoking Article 199 of the Constitution, it has been submitted by the learned Additional Advocate-General, Punjab, on instructions, that challan in the said F.I.R, has already been submitted on 5.5.2005, therefore, the petitioner may approach the concerned Court to pursue her remedy provided under the law. For further guidance, the learned counsel for the petitioner is referred to a latest judgment rendered by a learned Full Bench of this Court reported as Khizar Hayat Vs. IGP (PLD 2005 Lah. 470). With the above observations, this writ petition is disposed of.