Begum Akhtar Mirza made an application stating that Mst. Zahida Parveen had, in collaboration with some miscreants, stolen away her golden ornaments; domestic goods, etc., and when she made-an effort to get a criminal case registered against them, the police demanded bribe of Rs.4,000. It was disclosed by her that it was not possible for her to pay fee for a counsel for the purposes of filing writ petition and prayed that the Free Legal Aid Committee may be directed to provide her with the assistance of a counsel.
2. Keeping in view her allegations, I treated her application as a writ petition, by exercising my Constitutional jurisdiction suo motu, and directed her to file affidavit in support of her averments.
Thereupon, she submitted another application giving particulars of all the culprits and also naming the S.H.O. And the Sub-Inspector of Police Station, Sanda, Lahore, who had been approached by her for the registration of criminal case. According to her, the bribe was demanded by the S.H.O. Of the said police station. She submitted an affidavit to substantiate her allegations. On this I summoned the S.H.O. And directed him to file his report and parawise comments in regard to the subsequent application made by her, as it was a detailed one.
3. The S.H.O. Entered appearance before me and asked for a copy of subsequent application.
Accordingly, the desired copy was supplied to him and he was directed to submit his report and parawise-comments today. The S.H.O. Suggested that the other persons complained against may also be summoned. His plea was endorsed by the petitioner as well. I, therefore, directed that all the culprits shall be summoned for today.
4. Today, out of the alleged culprits, Mst. Zahida Parveen, Khurram Shahzad, Atif Shahzad and Atique Shahzad alias Shahzad have appeared before me alongwith a counsel, Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Vehniwal, Advocate. The said S.H.O. And Sub-Inspector are also present. The S.H.O. Has filed his report stating that a criminal case under sections 380 and 452 of the Pakistan Penal Code has been registered by him and investigation is in progress. The petitioner has disclosed that some other offences have also been committed in her case. I, therefore, direct the S.H.O. To record her supplementary statement and then proceed further according to law.
5. As regards the allegations that illegal gratification was demanded by the S.H.O., it has been refuted by him. There is no evidence to support this plea except the bald affidavit of the petitioner.
In the circumstances, I direct that if the petitioner is serious in pursuing the matter in this regard, she may approach the Anti-Corruption Authorities or the higher officers of the Police Department.
6. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of, with no order as to costs.
M.BA./B-32/L