' SYED MAHMOOD ALAM RIZVI, J.--- Through this petition the petitioner has prayed as under:--
(a) To declare the act of staff of respondents 6 and 7 rendering torture to the petitioner and extracting statement from him keeping him in detention whole night, and thereafter forcing him to make payment of alleged dues without adopting proper procedure laid down under the relevant rules of Pakistan Navy, after issuing no (demand) dues certificate to him, illegal, mala fide, amounting to excessive and harassment, misuse of authority, violation of rules and fundamental right inasmuch as against principles of natural justice.
(b) To direct the respondents Nos.2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 not to harass the petitioner by calling him through the police time and again or detained him in any office.
(c) To direct the respondents Nos.2 to 4 to produce details of dues against the petitioner, if any, which have not been provided so far which he had the right to have.
(d). To direct the respondent No,2 to hold inquiry against the staff of the respondent No,6 and the respondent No,7 about rending torture upon the petitioner and in that way extracting statement from him as per their dictation.
(e) To award, cost of petition.
(f) To grant any other relief, which the Honourable Court deems fit and proper and in the interest of justice.
2. Briefly, the facts, as stated by the petitioner, are that the petitioner was employed by Pakistan Navy as a Medical Assistant in May, 1971. He obtained promotions from time to time and retired from service as Honorary Lieutenant P.N., in May, 2002. He has an unblemished service record and due to his performance he has been awarded "Tamgha-e-Khidmat". After retirement the petitioner was being harassed by the respondents/officials of Pakistan Navy who levelled some allegations of misappropriation of funds and sale of medicines from the Navy Stores of P.N.S. Rahat. He was called by the high officials of Pakistan Navy through the Navel Police, kept in custody, and compelled to record statements in writing as per desires of the respondent No,7. The petitioner, therefore, wrote a letter to the Chief of Navel Staff, narrating the above facts but to no avail. Under such circumstances the petitioner filed this petition.
3. The prosecution case is that the petitioner was called by respondent No,7 to participate in the inquiry regarding theft/stealing/ pilferage of medicines at P.N.S. Rahat. The petitioner, in his capacity as Officer-in-charge Local Purchase, Store of P.N.S. Shifa obtained medicines worth Rs,15,00,000 and sold them illegally, and received an amount of Rs,4,50,000 as his share in the deal.
When the petitioner was confronted with the evidence against him he confessed his guilt before the Board of Inquiry/respondent No,7. The petitioner has earned approximately Rs,9,50,000 as illegal gains from his theft/stealing/ pilferage of locally purchased medicines during his posting in the Local Purchase Store of P.N.S. Shifa.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner has contended that actually the petitioner, after serving in Pakistan Navy had retired and that all dues, pension, etc. Had been paid to him without any objections of any kind whatsoever. However the extra-judicial confession was obtained under duress and had no value under law, but due to the continuous threats levelled by the Naval 'Police, the petitioner and his family had lost their peace and were feeling very insecure, and further, that the petitioner had never worked in P.N.S. Rahat and, therefore, his implication was bogus. He further contended that all the proceedings of the respondents were vague, mala fide and due to ulterior motives.
5. Conversely, the learned Deputy Attorney-General has contended that the petitioner admitted that he was an employee of Pakistan Navy, hence as per section 106(1) and (3) of Pakistan Navy Ordinance, 1961 the petitioner can be tried by a Court Martial of the Pakistan Navy, and he further contended that the petition was not maintainable under Article 199(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, as being a member of armed forces of Pakistan, the petitioner would not invoke the constitutional jurisdiction of this Honourable Court. That, prima facie, the evidence of other officials, namely Aijaz Javed and Amjad Hussain was also available, who have directly implicated the accused regarding embezzlement of medicines, and further, that on the basis of the 'above evidence/statements of his colleagues, the petitioner himself confessed before the Board of Inquiry on 20-4-2005 as to his crime. It is also contended that though the petitioner did not serve at P.N.S. Rahat, however, during the proceedings before the Board of Inquiry, the alleged accomplice of the petitioner also implicated the petitioner regarding the theft/pilferage of medicines by the petitioner during the petitioner's posting at Local Purchase Store of P.N.S. Shifa in the year 1997-98.
And as regards the issuance of no-demand certificate is concerned, it was contended that at the time of the retirement of the petitioner it was not in the knowledge of the Pakistan Navy that the petitioner had been involved in stealing/pilferage of locally-purchased medicines.
6. We have heard both the counsel at length and perused the record.
7. It is, an admitted position that the petitioner served in the Pakistan Navy as a Medical Assistant and retired finally as Honorary Lieutenant, P.N., in May, 2002 and that during the probe regarding the alleged theft of medicines, Aijaz Ahmed, MA-IV, Medical Store, P.N.S. Shifa, and Amjad Hussain, L.M.T.(C), recorded their statements and have specifically implicated the petitioner, which was also supported by the written statement recorded by the petitioner before the Board of Inquiry. Further, being a Naval Officer he cannot invoke the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199(3) of the Constitution, as the same reads as under:--- "Article 199(3) An order shall not be made under clause (1) on application made by or in relation to a person who is a member of the Armed Forces of Pakistan, or who is for the time being subject to any law relating to any of those Forces, in respect of his terms and conditions of service, in respect of any matter arising out of his service, or in respect of any action taken in relation to him as a member of the Armed Forces of Pakistan or as a person subject to such law."
8. In the above circumstances, The objections of the learned D.A.-G. Are sustained. This petition is not maintainable and is hereby dismissed in limine.
9. These are the reasons of our short order, dated 18-3-2008, by which we had dismissed the petition.