ORDER Through the instant constitutional petition filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, Mst. Bibi daughter of Ghulam Rabbani, has sought for direction to respondents Nos.1 and 2 to register a criminal case against the accused persons named in the application annexed with the petition at page No.21-B.
2. Succinctly facts of the case, arising Out of the contents of writ petition, are that the petitioner is resident of Mohallah Chaudharian, Hassan Abdal. On 10-11-2010 at 8-00 p.m. Real brother of the petitioner namely Ghulam Nabi went out of the house and did not return back, which worried the family. Upon enquiry, his friend Nadeem was also found absent from his house, which resulted into increase of worries of the family. The matter was reported to Police Station City Hassan Abdal and the police directed the petitioner to approach in the morning. In the morning at 7:55 the petitioner approached respondent No.2, who enquired about the data of mobile phone of misplaced Ghulam Nabi. During this course, information was received that both the misplaced persons were present in Police Station City, Fateh Jang. On enquiry, it came to the knowledge of the petitioner that the persons who abducted her brother were the employees of Police Station City Fateh Jang, who were wearing ordinary clothes at the time of incident and they had abducted the brother of the petitioner along with his friend from Abbot Abad Morr, Hassan Abdal, at the instance of S.H.O. Police Station Fateh Jang. At that time, one police employee namely Zahid picked out an amount of Rs.32,000 from the pocket of the brother of the petitioner. The police officials remained pressurizing for withdrawal of case F.I.R. No.272, offence under section 155(c) of the Police Order, 2002, registered with Police Station Hassan Abdal, which was registered at the instance of the petitioner. They also pressurized for compromising the case F.I.R. No.149, which too was registered at the instance of the petitioner, but the brother of the petitioner refused from doing so. Then some opponents of the petitioner side came there, and on the basis of fake and fictitious recovery, brother of the petitioner and his friend were booked in a forged case F.I.R. No.436, offence under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, registered with Police Station City Fateh Jang.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite moving application before the S.H.O.
Concerned for registration of criminal case against the Police Officials mentioned therein, the local police did not perform its statutory duty as provided under section 154, Cr.P.C. And ultimately the petitioner moved petition under sections 22-A, 22-B, Cr.P.C. Seeking registration of case against the culprits, upon which the learned Justice of Peace, Hassan Abdal directed RPO, Rawalpindi to hold an inquiry through some gazetted police officer enjoying good reputation and if as alleged by the petitioner, the police officials are found involved in the abduction of brother of the petitioner, then legal proceedings should be initiated against them. Learned counsel submits that despite direction issued by the learned Justice of Peace to the RPO, no proceedings have been carried out till date.
The petitioner again approached the learned Justice of Peace by way of moving another petition under sections 22-A, 22-B, Cr.P.C., the same was again disposed of with the direction to?The RPO, Rawalpindi to entrust the matter for inquiry against the police officials to a gazetted officer not below the rank of ASP, however, the same has also remained fruitless. In these circumstances, learned counsel has sought for direction to the respondents to take legal action on the application of the petitioner in accordance with the provisions contained in section 154, Cr.P.C. Moreover, learned counsel has urged that departmental inquiry initiated by the police hierarchy be expedited.
4. Learned Assistant Advocate-General, has not opposed the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner.
5. We have given my anxious consideration to the arguments advanced at the bar and have gone through the record as well as relevant law on the subject.
6. Perusal of application of the petitioner available at page 21-B of the instant petition reveals that real brother of A the petitioner along with his friend were allegedly abducted/ kidnapped by the police officials on the asking of S.H.O., Police Station Fateh Jange. On two separate applications filed by the petitioner under section 22-A, 22-B, Cr.P.C. The earned Ex-Officio Justice of Peace had directed RPO to proceed on the application of the petitioner after holding an enquiry through a gazetted officer and if averments of the application of the petitioner are found correct, then to proceed in the matter in accordance with law in view of provisions of section 154, Cr.P.C. According to which "every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence if given orally to an officer in charge of a Police Station shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction and be read over to the informant..."
7. We are fortified in our view by a landmark judgment of the august Supreme. Court of Pakistan in the case of Muhammad Bashir v. S.H.O. Okara Cantt. And others (PLD 2007 SC 539) while dealing a similar question held as under:- "Recording of F.LR. As to correctness or otherwise of information received by an officer Incharge of Police Station for the purpose being reduced in writing as F.I.R. And power of officer Incharge of Police Station to refuse to record the F.I.R. Only because in his opinion the allegations conveyed to him were false. No authority vested with an officer Incharge of a Police Station or with any one else to refuse to record F.I.R. Where the information conveyed discloses the commission of a cognizable.
Offence. No authority vested in Incharge of a Police Station or with any one else to hold any inqurly into the correctness or otherwise of the information which was conveyed to S.H.O. For the purpose of recording F.I.R. "
8. In sequel to what has been discussed above, by allowing the instant constitutional petition, S.H.O.
Of Police Station City Hassan Abdal/respondent No.2 is directed, to entertain the application of the petitioner (available at Page 21-B), pending before him and proceed strictly in accordance with law keeping in view the provisions of section 154, Cr.P.C. And dictum of law laid down by august Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case referred to above.
9. On Court's query Muhammad Tufail, SPP (RIB), Rawalpindi states that on the application of the petitioner departmental inquiry is underway to evaluate the negligence ascribed to S.H.O., Police Station Fateh Jang and there is every likelihood that the same would be concluded within fifteen days. When confronted that how many days have elapsed, he states that show-cause notice was issued to the delinquent police officer on 11-5-2011 as such eight days have elapsed and within next one week, the inquiry being conducted by AIG shall be concluded and if any fault on behalf of S.H.O.
Is found then he would be Proceeded in accordance with law.
10.Be that as it may, RPO, Rawalpindi is directed to get expedite the inquiry and if the S.H.O. Is found at fault then strict disciplinary as well as legal proceedings be initiated against him under intimation to this Court through Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Bench .