1. Through this Constitutional Petition, under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the petitioner Muhammad Arif has sought the indulgence of this Court that direction may be issued to respondent No.3 to refrain from threatening the petitioner in any manner whatsoever nature and due protection of law be provided to him.
2. Through this petition, the petitioner simply seeks directions to the official/private respondents not to cause any kind of harassm ent to the petitioner and to provide protection to him as provided under the law.
3. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.3 Superintendent of Police is harassing him and interfering in his daily affairs in connivance with his son, without lawful justification, hence he has filed instant constitutional petitions against the highhandedness of official respondents who are in league with private respondent No.3.
4. Admittedly, these are the cases of harassment at the hands of police in connivance with private respondents. The meaning of the word "harass" has been explained as "Injure and injury"; these words have numerous and comprehensive popular meanings, as well as having a legal import. A line may be drawn between these words and the word "harass" excluding the latter from being comprehended within the word "injure" or "injury". The synonyms of "harass" are: Weary, tire, perplex, distress tease, vex, molest, trouble, and disturb. They all have relation to mental annoyance." In the Oxford Dictionary of New Words, the meaning of the word "harassment" has been explained, which reads as "The subjection of a person to aggressive pressure or intimidation. "Harassment" should be interpreted as potentially producing some unreasonably adverse impact on the victim. The conduct should produce more than "worry", "trouble", "discomfort" or "unease" unless perhaps these are experienced to an extreme degree."
5. The main objectives of police is to apprehend offenders, investigate crimes, and prosecute them before the courts also to prevent the commission of crime, and above all ensure law and order to protect citizens' life and property. The law enjoins the police to be scrupulously fair to the offender and the Magistracy is to ensure a fair investigation and fair trial for an offender. Unfortunately, these objectives have remained unfulfilled. Aberrations of police officers and police excesses in dealing with the law and order situation have been the subject of adverse comments from this Court as well as from other courts but they have failed to have any corrective effect on it. The police has the power to arrest a person even without obtaining a warrant of arrest from a court.
6. The plenty of this power casts an obligation on the police and it must bear in mind, as held by this Court that if a person is arrested for a crime, his constitutional and fundamental rights must not be violated. Primarily, the Police Officers are required to protect and not abduct.
7. Learned counsel representing respondent No.3 has filed objections and raised the question of the maintainability of this petition on the premise that the petitioner has failed to avail his remedy under Section 22-A and 22-B Cr. P.C. before the justice of the peace, however, learned counsel as well as Addl. P.G. in unequivocal terms submits that no harassment shall be caused to the petitioner. Respondent No.3 present in Court undertakes that he will not cause any harassment to the petitioner and will act strictly under the law.
8. Their statement is tenable and this petition is liable to be disposed of in terms of the statement of learned APG as well as respondent No.3; however, it is made clear that if there is any private/civil dispute between the parties, the same shall be dealt with by the competent court of law/forum and this Court will not travel into that dispute and leave it for the competent forum to redress the same if approached by the aggrieved party under the law within a reasonable time. As far as police harassm ent issues are concerned, the DIG Central has to see the matter and take prompt action under the law, if the petitioner approaches him, however, that is subject to a fact-finding inquiry to be conducted by the DIG Police Central about the highhandedness of the police of the area.
9. In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with the direction to the police to act under the law and no harassm ent shall be caused to the petitioner, besides no interference shall be made in their private/civil dispute and the police shall be neutral in private affairs. However, if any of the parties indulged in cognizable offenses police shall act under law.