1. I have heard the learned counsel at considerable length. The petitioner, her husband and the Police Officers have also been heard in person. The petitioner states in open Court that she was subjected to rape by Abdul Hameed etc. Accordingly, a case under section 10 of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 was registered against the accused with Police Station Tandlianwala, on 30-12-1990. Grievance was that the case was not properly investigated by the investigating officer. Muhammad Nazir Inspector/S.H.O. Was summoned. He was directed to investigate the case according to law. The said Police Officer was, however in the meantime, transferred from Police Station Tandlianwala and as such the investigation of the case could not be completed by him.
2. Thereafter, a direction was also given to Abdul Majeed S.L/S.H.O. To conclude investigation of the case within a period of five days. He states that he recorded the statement of Mst. Nasim Bibi and also collected the necessary evidence from the locality about the said occurrence. According to his investigation, no incident as alleged by the petitioner took place in the locality. He, however, concedes that from the statement of the petitioner now recorded by him, an offence under section 10 of the Office of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 was made out. The petitioner states that she was subjected .To rape by Abdul Hameed etc., and that the Police Officers are in league with the accused as having been won over by them. Mr. Aftab Iqbal Chaudhry, learned Deputy Attorney General and Mr. Akhtar Shabbir, learned Additional Advocate-General have brought to the notice of the Court, after reading, the police tile, that a positive direction was given to the S.H.O. Police Station Tandlianwala by the D.S.P. For registration of a case on 19-12-1990 but the Police Officer did not comply with the direction of his superior by registering a case against the accused. Later on, the petitioner appeared before Mr. Zafar Abbas Luk, S.S.P., Faisalabad, for redressal of her grievance. According to the petitioner, a telephonic order was' issued to the Police Officer for registration of a case on 30-12-1990. It is maintained that on the instructions of the S.S.P. a case was registered against the accused. It is stated that the investigation conducted by the two Police Officers is contradictory in nature. The learned Law Officers have also stated that the report of the Chemical Examiner, dated 5-1-1991 is positive. It is maintained by the learned counsel that there insufficient evidence available on record to submit challan before the Court for trial of the accused. An allegation has been levelled that illegal gratification was taken by the Police Officers from the accused. I am satisfied that the mode and the way in which investigation was conducted by the respondent Police Officers was definitely based on mala fides inasmuch -as no positive steps were taken by the Police Officers to initially register. The case on receipt of the information of a cognizable offence from the petitioner and also in collecting the necessary evidence in that behalf. The fact that a case was registered under section 182, P.P.C. Against the petitioner demonstrates beyond any shadow of doubt that she was made an accused person without any legal justification with a view to pressurize her so that she may not-pursue the case in hand against the accused. The learned Law Officer's suggest that investigation of the case may be entrusted to some Senior Police Officer to meet the ends of justice. Their argument in that behalf appears to be just and proper. In this view of the matter, the S.S.P., Faisalabad shall personally investigate the case and would try to conclude the investigation as early as possible. The Investigating officer may consider the statement of the prosecutrix coupled with the opinion given by the Chemical Examiner. He is also directed to take appropriate departmental action against the respondents Police Officers according to law they failed to handle the case properly. In case he comes to the conclusion that they did not perform their duties as commanded by law and that they are liable departmentally to be proceeded against, he may not feel any hesitation in proceeding against them. He shall also submit a compliance report to this Court through the learned Law Officer. The petitioner alongwith her witnesses and the respondent Police Officers shall appear before the S.S.P., Faisalabad on 1-8-1991. Office is directed to send a copy of this order for its compliance to the S.S.P., Faisalabad through a special messenger. In view of these observations, no further action in the criminal original against the Police Officers is called for. The contempt notice issued to them is hereby recalled. The contempt matter thus stands disposed of. The S.S.P. Shall see to it that full protection under the law is given to the petitioner and her family members as requested by her. Mr. Aftab Iqbal Chaudhry, learned Deputy Attorney---General undertakes to convey the order to the S.S.P. For its compliance.
3. SA./N-492/L