' FAZAL-E-MIRAN CHAUHAN. J.---Through this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashment of case F.I.R. No,125, dated 27-2-2007 registered under sections 420,468,471, P.P.C. At Police Station Saddar Pakpattan Sharif.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the case has been registered with mala fide intention of the police; that the petitioner purchased the vehicle after getting loan facility from Meezan Bank, Faisalabad and letter, dated 31-1-2007 was duly issued for use of saidvehicle in favor of petitioner; that an amount of Rs,21755 was paid for its registration to the Motor Registration Authority, Faisalabad and registration No,FDA-07-1706 was issued vide challan No,5452, dated 15- 2-2007. Further adds that on 22-2-2007 petitioner was going to the said vehicle when respondents despite examining the titled documents with mala fide intention took into possession the vehicle and detained the petitioner. On 27-2-2007 respondents with mala fide intention registered the above criminal case. Neither the vehicle in question is a stolen car nor was it snatched.
2A. Learned Assistant Prosecutrix General has controverted the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner:
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and examined the record.
4. Admittedly, the petitioner purchased the said vehicle while getting the facility from Meezan Bank, Faisalabad and letter, dated 31-1-2007 was duly issued for use of said vehicle in favor of petitioner; that an amount of Rs,21755 was paid for its registration to the Motor Registration Authority, Faisalabad and registration No,FDA-07-1706 was issued vide challan No,5452, dated 15-2-2007. On 22-2-2007 the respondents took into possession the said vehicle under section 550, Cr.P.C. Despite production of the titled documents and detained the petitioner. Superdari of the car was allowed vide order, dated 6-3-2007 by the Magistrate but the respondents refused to release the vehicle.
On 27-2-2007 respondents with mala fide intention registered the above criminal case. Neither the vehicle in question was a stolen car nor it was snatched by the petitioner. No document was forged nor was produced to cheat the police. No fraud or forgery was committed by the petitioner. It was .a duly registered vehicle. The registration of case was sheer mala fide on the part of the police, which amounts to the abuse of process of law, as the petitioner cannot be condemned unheard.
5. Heard. Record perused. The S.H.O., in attendance, admits that the vehicle, in question, was taken into possession under section 550, Cr.P.C. It was carrying a number plate usually used, when the owners had applied for registration, but the said applied for plate was not in use of any car dealer and was being used to defraud the official and publicat-large.
6. Maintainability of petition is to be seen in the facts and conduct of the police. The police does not have free hand to play havoc with the rights, life, liberty and honour of the citizen and to use it as a lever to commit atrocities on innocent citizen under the garb of investigation. A.S.-I./Incharge of investigation has not taken single step to progress the investigation pending with him. His attitude towards investigationappears to be very causal. F.I.R. Was lodged on 27-2-2007 and no steps were taken to complete the same but appear that he was vexing with the same to give torture to the accused, which is evident from the lack of interest in concluding and completing the investigation within the time specified. This reflects on the mala fide of police and strengthened the allegation that he is being dragged in the case was being humiliated on the instigation of police employees.
7. For what has been discussed above, it appears that the vehicle, in question, was taken into possession by the police under section 550, Cr.P.C. Suspecting that the same was either stolen or was used in the commission of offence. Later on, no such fact was disclosed and from the record, it appears that the vehicle was taken into possession simply for the reason that the same was carrying a number plate, which is usually used for the interregnum period from the date of purchase till the registration of the same, the period provided for the registration under the law.
This act of taking the car into possession under section 550, Cr.P.C. Shows the atrocity of the police.
Again when the vehicle was directed to be released on Superdari, the same was released on one pretext or the other, which seems to defy the order passed by a competent Court. From the record, it is evident that the vehicle was purchased and owned by the petitioner and was duly registered as FDA-07-1706 and a letter to this effect was issued by the Motor Registration Authority, Excise and Taxation Department, Faisalabad on 15-2-2007. On refusal of Supedari, the petitioner was constrained to file contempt petition against Tahir Waheed Butt-S.H.O. And Muhammad Asghar-S.- I. The car was given on Superdari on 26-3-2007. The S.H.O. In the report and parawise comments, introduced a new case that one Muhammad Ashraf was also arrested on the same day, while he was sitting in the said car, who was carrying 222 unlicensed rifle and a case was registered against him. All this appears to have been concocted by the police and to justify their illegal acts, which leads to the conclusion that altogether false and fabricated case was registered against the petitioner with mala fide intention on the behest of employee of police force.
8. Resultantly, this petition is allowed and F.I.R. No,125, dated 27-2-2007 registered at Police Station Saddar Pakpattan is quashed. The District Police Officer, Pakpattan is directed to look into the matter and take stern action against the delinquent police officials and submit report to the Deputy Registrar .(Judicial) of this Court within a fortnight from the date of receipt of this order.
F.I.R. Quashed.