' M.A. SHAHID SIDDIQUI, J.---Muhammad Javed, petitioner has sought bail in case F.I.R. No,251 of 2005, dated 30-5-2005 registered at Police Station Cantt. Gujranwala for the offences under sections 337-A(iii)/337-H(ii)/337-L(ii)/148/149, P.P.C.
2. On the last date of hearing the petitioner was released on ad interim post-arrest bail with the concurrence of the learned counsel forthe complainant in order to enable the parties to settle the terms of compromise. The complainant is present in person. He states that the compromise has been finalized. According to which both the parties have compounded the offence. Copies of the agreement have been handed over to Muhammad Mansha, A.S.-I. The S.H.O. Police Station Cantt., Gujranwala shall finalize his report under section 173, Cr.P.C. In the light of the agreement and submit the same in the competent Court of law within a fortnight.
3. During the course of arguments on the last date of hearing it transpired that the occurrence had, in fact, been reported to Tariq Farooq Cheema, the then S.H.O., Police Station, Cantt., Gujranwala by means of written complaint, dated 24-5-2005 made by Muhammad Yousaf, cousin of Muhammad Ali, complainant. This complaint was neither entered in the relevant Register under section 154, Cr.P.C. Nor was considered as a report for non-cognizable offence as envisaged in section 155, Cr.P.C. The instant case was registered on 30-5-2005 on a fresh complaint received from Muhammad Ali, in which the prosecution version had been slightly improved. Had the case been registered on the basis of first complaint made by Muhammad Yousaf, the prosecution case would not have been prejudiced in any manner. Tariq Farooq Cheema, S.H.O., appeared to have willfully breached or neglected the mandatory provisions of law punishable under Article 155(c) of the Police Order, 2002. Accordingly, he was called upon to explain his position.
4. Tariq Farooq Cheema/S.H.O. In his reply admitted to have received written complaint made by Muhammad Yousaf. However, he had shifted the responsibility on his subordinate Mushtaq Ahmad, A.S.-I. He maintained that he had marked the said complaint to Mushtaq Ahmad, A.S.-I., for necessary action under the law. I am not satisfied with the explanation. The S.H.O. Under the law is responsible for the irregularities and illegalities committed by his subordinates. The mere fact that he had marked the complaint to his subordinate would not absolve him from his responsibilities. To report a crime to the Police is the most difficult job for an ordinary man having no means. In most of cases the complainant has to hire the services of Police Touts. In the case in hand the registration of case was delayed either for extraneous consideration or due to lack of supervision of Tariq Farooq Cheema. Such willful defiance of law, which has, in fact, become a regular practice, is a menace to our existing system of administration of justice. There is no defect in the law. The fault lies with the man who has neither the will nor the capacity to administer it in its true spirit. In order to avoid total collapse of our judicial system efforts should be made to prevent such lapses, which often makes the task of the Courts difficult should not go unchecked. I, would, therefore, direct the competent authority to initiate departmental action against the said officer in accordance with law within two months. A copy of this order shall be sent to District Police Officer, Gujranwala through Fax.