' By this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Sardar All son of Muhammad Siddique, resident of village Jaslani Kalan, Police Station Warburton, District Sheikhupura, seeks direction to the respondent to register case.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the petitioner's sister namely Mst. Nasim Bibi died on 28th February, 1980 as a result of pistol shot injury suffered by her in her head, while she was present in her house in Mandi Warburton Town, District Sheikhupura. Muhammad Siddique, her father, on 28th February. 1980 at 5-30 p.m. Lodged information at Police Station Warburton that 12/13 days prior to the occurrence he performed Nikah of Mst. Nasim Bibi with Riasat Ali contrary to the wishes of her daughter and other members of his family, including his wife, Sardar Ali petitioner and Rang Elahi. One Rehmat Ali son of Kamir Khan was considered by him as his adopted son, to whom neither the petitioner nor Rang Elahi liked and pressed upon Muhammad Siddique to abandon him, but he declined. Later, Muhammad Siddique, accompanied by his daughter Mst.
Nasim Bibi, his wife, Kamir Khan, Rehmat Ali son of Kamir Khan, approached a Maulvi at Jaliwala Mor, for obtaining "fatwa" for revocation of the Nikah. The latter promised to give "fatwa" after 4/5 days. On the faitful day Rehmat All went to obtain "fatwa" and brought it at 12 noon. While Muhammad Siddique, his wife, Kamir Khan and Rehmat Ali were present at the shop of Muhammad Siddique, Allah Ditta, another son of Muhammad Siddique, came running towards them with information that Mst. Nasim Bibi had committed suicide. They rushed to the spot and found the deceased at the last moments of her life. The Police Officer, after recording the report, purportedly under section 174, Cr. P.C. Proceeded to the place of occurrence.
3 The Police file shows that he prepared inquest report and sent intimation of the incident to the Ilaqa Magistrate, Nankana Sahib. He despatched the dead body for post-mortem examination. His investigation, verified by S.H.O. And confirmed by D.S.P., Nankana Sahib, revealed that Mst. Nasim Bibi by using licensed pistol of his father committed suicide and no cognizable offence appeared committed.
4. On 29th February, 1980 Rang Elahi appeared before the D.S.P. And made statement giving another version of occurrence, alleging that she was put to death by Rehmat Ali. The D.S.P.
However, did not rely on his statement in face of overwhelming evidence supporting the version of her father.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the provisions of section 154, Cr. P. C. Are mandatory and the Police Officer is bound to register a case if the facts narrated disclose commission of cognizable offence. It is further contended that in fact Rehmat Ali wanted to marry the deceased, and on performing her Nikah with Riasat Ali, he got desperate and murdered her. It is also submitted that the father of the deceased wanted to shield Rahmat Ali whom he had adopted as his son against the wishes of other members of family. It is also argued that by not registering the case the real culprit would go unpunished. It is stated that the local police, in collusion with the father of the deceased and Rehmat Ali accused, who is an influential landlord of the area, wants to hush up the case.
4. Syed Altaf Hussain Shah, Advocate, on the other hand, contended that Mohammad Siddique, the father of the deceased, lodged information with the Police immediately after the occurrence. The moment an information is conveyed, the investigation is put in action and in the course of investigation if the Commission of cognizable offence comes to the notice of the Investigating Officer, he is not precluded to register case and apprehend the culprits. It is argued that first information has already been lodged on 28th February, 1980 and registration of case at this stage was neither warranted under the law, nor on the basis of evidence available on the record.
5. The relevant provisions of law in this connection are sections 174 and 175 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The former deals with enquiries and reports with regard to the cause of death of persons believed to have committed suicide, or to have been killed by others, or by animals, or by accident, or to have died under circumstances raising a reasonable suspicion that some other person has committed an offence, and directs a Police .Officer In charge of a Police Station or some other Police Officer specially empowered, on receiving information to immediately proceed to the place of occurrence where the dead body is lying and in the presence of two or more respectable inhabitants of the neighborhood to make an investigation and draw up report of the apparent cause of death. This section further enjoins that the Investigating Officer would mention in the report the description of the wounds, fractures, bruises and the other marks of injuries as may be found on the dead body, together with his opinion with regard to the manner or the weapon or instrument, if any, with which such marks appear to have been inflicted. Subsection (5) of section 174 of the Cr P. C. Is to the effect that the District Magistrate, Sub-Divisional Magistrate and Magistrate of First Class, as well as all Magistrates specially empowered in that behalf by the Provincial Government or District Magistrate, are empowered to hold inquests.
' Section 175 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is to the following effect :- "175.-(1) A Police Officer proceeding under section 174 may by order in writing summon two or more-persons as aforesaid for the purpose of the said investigation, and any other person who appears to be acquainted with the facts of the case. Every person so summoned shall be bound to attend and to answer truly all questions other than questions the answers to which would have a tendency to expose him to a criminal charge, or to a penalty or forfeiture.
(2) If the facts do not disclose a cognizable offence to which section 170 applies, such persons shall not be required by the police-officer to attend a Magistrate's Court."
' The above provisions of law make it clear that the Police Officer after the receipt of the information has to reach the place of occurrence and make investigation in respect of the cause of death of the person and submit a report to the nearest Magistrate. During the investigation if the officer finds commission of cognizable offence and sufficient evidence against the accused, he is not precluded from taking him under custody and forward him to the Court empowered to take cognizance of the offence upon a police report and try the accused.
' In the instant case, the Magistrate, Nankana Sahib, is already under intimation of the incident and, prima facie, competent to hold inquiry (inquest) into the cause of the death of the deceased person. So far the police has prepared inquest report, obtained post-mortem report, took pistol into possession, recorded statements of various persons and taken steps to collect other relevant evidence except chemical report receipt whereof is awaited. It goes without saying that if the allegation raised spell out commission of cognizable offence, the matter falls under section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Police Officer is under statutory obligation to register a case.
6. Now, in the light of the above circumstances, it has to be seen whether it is necessary to issue direction for registration of the case. It is well established that the person aggrieved, before invoking Constitutional jurisdiction, has to satisfy the Court that there is no other adequate or efficacious remedy available to him under the law. Undoubtedly, the petitioner has the remedy to lodge private complaint and can also move application to the Illaqa Magistrate, who is competent under section 174(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to inquire about the cause of the death of the deceased. In the private complaint the Magistrate, before taking cognizance of the case under section 156(3), Cr. P. C. May direct the Police to investigate the matter. Similarly, before issuing process, the Magistrate may inquire about the correctness of allegations in the complaint himself or direct an inquiry or investigation to be made by a Magistrate subordinate to him or a Police Officer or any other person he considers fit for the purpose. In the proceedings in a complaint, the evidence collected by the police during investigation can be utilized by the petitioner in support of his version.
7. In the circumstances of this case. I am not persuaded to issue direction for registration of case, particularly when more appropriate alternative remedy is available to the petitioner. The apprehension of the petitioner that the actual culprit would escape if case is not registered, does not appear to be well founded, because, the Court taking cognizance of the case can bring the culprit to book if evidence on the record connects him with the commission of crime.
8. For the reasons recorded above, this petition fails and is dismissed, with no order as to costs.