1. ' AFTAB AHMED GORAR, J.---Through this Criminal Miscellaneous Application filed under section 561-A, applicant Izhar Hussain has prayed for quashment of proceedings under Charge Sheet No.101 dated 12-11-2012 vide F.I.R. No.150/2012 registered at Police Station Khokhrapar, Karachi on 30- 10-2012. received by police high-ups alleging therein that the applicant, being S.H.O. Khokhrapar at the relevant time, was providing shelter to the criminal activities of one notorious drug seller/peddler namely Haji Aslam and that he received Rs.4 lacs as bribe in a case registered vide F.I.R. No.119/2012 at Police station Khokhrapar, wherein huge quantity of charas was recovered, for releasing the accused persons and also retained the contraband charas with him and thereafter sold the same to Haji Aslam. On the direction of the higher authorities enquiry was conducted in which the applicant was exonerated from the charges of not taking legal action against Haji Aslam and selling the Charas viz. The case property to him, however, he was held responsible that although more than 4 KG of charas was recovered from accused Abid Mumtaz but F.I.R. Was registered for only 4 Kgs. At Police station Khokhrapar where the applicant was posted as s.H.O. At the relevant time. Consequently, a case under section 409, P.P.C. Was ordered to be registered against the applicant and accordingly F.I.R. No.150/2012 was registered at Police station Khokhrapar.
2. ' After registration of F.I.R., charge sheet was prepared in which applicant was nominated as accused. Applicant got interim pre-arrest bail on 5-11-2012 which still continues. The instant Criminal Miscellaneous Application has been filed for quashment of the proceedings culminating from the said F.I.R.
3. ' Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the enquiry against the applicant was conducted on the basis of an anonymous application having no date, time, place and even signature of the person moving the said application. He further contended that during the enquiry, no witness uttered a single word against the applicant except one AsI Hamid with whom the applicant has old departmental rivalry; that even the statement of said AsI Hamid is not reliable as he narrated altogether a different version; that there is no evidence to establish that the recovered charas was more than 4 Kgs., as such the registration of F.I.R. On the basis of such vague statement is totally illegal and unlawful. According to him, in fact, although the applicant is a respectable and honest police official having good reputation but he has been falsely implicated in the case due to departmental intrigue at the instance of influential police officials with whom he had altercation on departmental affairs. He prayed for quashment of the proceedings. He relied upon the case-law reported in 2011 sCMR 863, 1995 PCr.LJ 256, 1997 PCr.LJ 991, PLD 1985 sC 62, 1993 sCMR 187, 1997 sCMR 304, 1997 sCMR 1503 and 2000 PCr.LJ 502.
4. ' Conversely, learned A.P.G. Opposed the application contending that the applicant being a police officer has misused his official position and has used the same for procuring illegal gains., According to him, the applicant who being custodian of the law has indulged himself in criminal activities, as such deserves no leniency. He further argued that the application under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. Is not maintainable as the applicant in the first instance should approach the trial court for such purpose. He prayed for dismissal of the Criminal Miscellaneous Application.
5. ' I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.P.G. Appearing for the state.
6. So far as the objection as to maintainability of Criminal Miscellaneous Application is concerned, suffice it to say that this Court has been bestowed the inherent powers to make such orders to prevent abuse of process of law and to secure the ends of justice under section 561-A of the Criminal Procedure Code. Of course normally in A the first instance trial court should be approached under section 249-A or 265-K, Cr.P.C., as the case may be, however, in appropriate cases there is no bar to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under section 561-A, Cr.P.C.
7. ' From the perusal of the material on the record, it appears that DIG, East Zone, Karachi received an anonymous application and marked the same to ssP Clifton Division. Neither name of the person moving the said application was mentioned in the application, nor the application was signed by any person. ssP ordered for conducting enquiry on the basis of the said application and on conclusion of the enquiry, he directed s.H.O. Police station Khokhrapar to register F.I.R. Against the applicant. After registration of F.I.R. The s.H.O. Thought to have sent the case to Anti-Corruption Police but he directed I.O. Of the same police station to conduct investigation who had no power to conduct the investigation against a government servant. During the investigation nobody came forward to say anything against the applicant except one AsI Hamid who stated in his 161, Cr.P.C.
8. Statement that he has recovered 10 Kg charas from a Rikshaw. Neither he has produced any departure entry nor any memo of recovery before the I.O. According to him, he conducted the raid along with the then s.H.O. i.e. The present applicant and they recovered 10 kg charas from the house of the applicant. After conducting investigation I.O. Submitted charge sheet before the concerned Magistrate who directed to send the investigation to Anti-Corruption Authorities.
9. ' It appears that the mala fide on the part of the complainant and the I.O. Of the case is very much clear as both of them never handed over the investigation to Anti-Corruption Authorities. Moreover, there is no material to substantiate the plea that the applicant misappropriated the case property viz. Charas.
10. ' The grievance of the applicant was that respondent No.1 viz. Inspector Aslam Pervaiz present posted as S.H.O. Police station Khokhrapar and the I.O. Who conducted the investigation of the case and submitted charge sheet are prejudiced to the applicant, as such he apprehends some foulplay at their hands. However, as stated above, on the direction of the concerned Magistrate the investigation has been transferred to Anti-Corruption Police, as such t1 re apprehension of the applicant does not exist. However, at the same time it is the right of the applicant to have a fair and impartial investigation.
11. In the circumstances, I am of the opinion that it would be just and proper to dispose of the Criminal Miscellan ous Application in the following terms:-
(i) Director, Anti-Corruption Establishment is directed to depute a responsible and well reputed officer to conduct the investigation in a transparent manner;
(ii) I.G. Police and DIG East Zone, Karachi are directed not to take any action against the applicant till final decision of the case by the trial Court.
12. ' . The Criminal Miscellaneous Application stands disposed in he above terms.
13. ' Office to supply a copy of this order to learned A.P.G. Who is. Required to fax the same to Director Anti-Corruption, I.G. Police as well as D.I.G. East Zone, Karachi for compliance.