Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
2010 YLR 911

MUHAMMAD ARSHAD JAMEEL vs S.H.O., P.S. MUZAFFARGARH, MULTAN and

Citation2010 YLR 911
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Writ Petition No,8558 of 2009
Date2010-01-12
Judge(s)Hafiz Abdul Rehman Ansari
ResultPetition dismissed

ORDER

'HAFIZ ABDUL REHMAN ANSARI, J.---Through this writ petition, the petitioner seeks issuance of a direction to respondent No, I, S.H.O. Police Station Muzaffargarh, Multan to record version of the petitioner and register a criminal case against the respondents Nos.2 and 8. Petitioner has assailed the order dated 27-8-2008 passed by learned Justice of Peace/Additional Sessions Judge, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge ordered to avail alternate remedy of filing a private complaint against the police officials.

2. Brief facts of the case are that Muhammad Waqas, real brother of Abdul Sattar respondent committed suicide in the shop of Ghulam Mustafa Tailor Master while giving scissors blow to himself on 31-3-2009 being overwhelmed by the circumstances.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that Muhammad Waqas, real brother of Abdul Sattar respondent committed suicide in the shop of Ghulam Mustafa Tailor Master while giving scissors blow to himself on 31-3-2009 being overwhelmed by the circumstances; the deceased made a statement before the Medical Officer that he received the injuries on account of falling from the motorcycle but the respondent No,3 gave this occurrence a colour of murder; Faisal Jameel brother of the petitioner was got arrested by the complainant in the F.I.R. Registered regarding the murder along with Ghulam Mustafa Tailor Master but their arrest was not shown in the daily diary; brother of the petitioner was subjected to violence by the police to extort confession; Mst. Saima wife of Ghulam Musatafa accused wrote letter to the Honourable Chief Justice, Supreme Court of Pakistan whereupon an inquiry was conducted by the learned Sessions Judge, Multan; due to fear of the said inquiry the Police released both the accused persons; police have kept the brother of the petitioner in illegal confinement, thus, the police committed cognizable offence.

4. According to the report of S.H.O. Abdul Sattar got registered F.I.R. No,143/ 2009 dated 2-4-2009 under section 302/34, P.P.C. At Police Station Muzaffargarh against Faisal Jameel brother of the complainant and Ghulam Mustafa Tailor Master. Brother of the petitioner was never arrested in the case as only the suspicion was raised by the complainant against him. F.I.R. Was recommended for cancellation during the investigation on 20-8-2009. Brother of the petitioner and his co-accused Ghulam Mustafa once came at the Police Station but thereafter they were relieved after getting personal bond. Abdul Sattar respondent No,3 and the remaining private respondents are still of the view that brother of the petitioner and Ghulam Mustafa are the real culprits of the murder of Muhammad Waqas and they are forcing the police to cause the arrest of the accused. Learned Justice of Peace rightly observed that there is no medical evidence regarding the maltreatment of the brother of the petitioner and the petitioners should avail alternate remedy of filing a private complaint.

5. It is not obligatory on this court, in each and every case, sitting in writ jurisdiction, order passes for recording of statement of complainant under section 154, Cr.P.C. If nothing is to be recovered from the alleged accused, and the entire evidence is in the possession of complainant, then filing of private complaint is also appropriate remedy. I am fortified from the judgment titled as Haji Muhammad Khan v. Ch. Khizar Hayat and others PLD 1977 Lah. 424(DB) wherein it is observed, when entire evidence to prove commission of offence is in possession of complainant, complaint before a Magistrate in such cases is adequate remedy. Learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to point out any illegality or irregularity in the order passed by learned Justice of Peace. Order passed by the learned Justice of Peace is quite in consonance with law. Therefore, this petition is dismissed in limine.

Cited by 1 case

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch