' ALI BAQAR NAJAFI, J.---The petitioner, through this Constitutional Petition, seeks the act of the respondents for removal of cattle of the petitioner from her Haveli under Article 134 of Police Order, 2002 and for the return of the same to the petitioner.
2. Brief facts giving rise to the filing of this writ petition are that on 4-6-2012 the local police of Police station Khurrarianwala visited the house of the petitioner and took away animals i.e. 5 buffaloes, a cow etc. From her Haveli to the police station. Meanwhile, the petitioner moved an application for superdari of the cattle in which the learned. Judicial Magistrate requisitioned the report wherein the stand was taken by the police that cattle were removed under section 134 of Police Order, 2002 as the same belonging to Muhammad Yar son of Allah Ditta and Muhammad sabir son of shahamat accused persons and absconders of F.I.R. No.289 dated 26-4-2010, under sections 302, 324, 148, 149, P.P.C. And F.I.R. No.350 of 2012 dated 3-6-2012 under sections 302, 148, 149, P.P.C. Registered at Police station Khurrarianwala, the petitioner then withdrew the application.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the police has no jurisdiction to remove the cattle under Article 134 of the Police Order, 2002 which is not an unclaimed property and belongs to, the petitioner; that earlier Writ Petition No.22675 of 2012 filed by the petitioner was withdrawn on 24-10- 2012 for the time being, hence prays for the relief.
4. Report was requisitioned from SHO, Police station, Khurrarianwala District Faisalabad who stated that the petitioner has no concern with the cattle and on his earlier application DSP, inquired the matter and concluded that she was not the owner; that earlier petition filed by the petitioner was withdrawn and the second petition is not competent.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the available record.
6. Under Article 134 of the Police Order, 2002 the police is empowered to make inventory of unclaimed property which shall be sent to the C.P,O who will issue proclamation within a fortnight requiring for the claimant to establish his claim within three months. Such property, on satisfaction of its title, shall be given to such a person. However, in the instant case it is not denied that the petitioner is the only claimant of the cattle. Moreover, there is nothing to suggest that same belonged to two proclaimed 'offenders except the statement of the police officials, who themselves had failed to arrest the absconders in the said two F.I.Rs. On the other hand, the record reveals that the petitioner has been moving from pillar to post for the cattle. It is also noted that as per report and comments, recently no inquiry was conducted by the CPO concerned to ascertain the ownership of the said property. In this view of the matter, while following the view taken in Roshan Ali v. SHO reported as (2011 YLR 1609), this writ petition is disposed of with direction to the C.P.O, Faisalabad to call the concerned SHO, take the cattle back from him and hand them over to the petitioner on her personal bond being the only claimant. An inquiry shall also be conducted against the culprits who illegally detained the said cattle without following the procedure prescribed under the law. The C.P.O. Shall also decide about the compensation if any to the petitioner. The final outcome of the report shall be submitted to this Court through Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court till 15-4-2014.