' A case F.I.R. No,633/1991 was registered with the Police Station Chunian, District Kasur on 8-10-1991 on the complaint of Bukhtiar Ahmad son of Muhammad Arshad under sections 419/420, 468/471, P.P.C. Against petitioner No,1 Fakhar Alam, Muhammad Iqbal son of Fazal Din, Muhammad Ismail son of Imam Din, Allah Ditta son of Arora, Muhammad Ismail son of Nizam Din, Muhammad Sarwar Dogar, Jan Muhammad son of Bagh Ali, Abdul Razzaq son of Abdullah, Hasham and M.M. Afzal, Advocate, Lahore. The complainant had alleged that his father Muhammad Arshad, retired Subedar, was allotted 204 Kanals of land in the area of Mauza Haroki Hithar, Police Station Kanganpur in 1960, as an Army Officer. The abovesaid accused persons prepared a forged general power of attorney in the name of one Muhammad Iqbal son of Fazal Din, accused and on 30-6-1991 got registered a forged sale-deed in a deceitful manner, and fraudulently conveyed the land of his father valuing Rs,10,00,000 by preparing a sale-deed. By manoeuvring such a general power of attorney, on 30-6-1991 the accused had got registered false sale-deeds of the land of Lal Din son of Fazal Din measuring 198 Kanals 15 Marlas and that of Fazal Elahi son of Karam Elahi measuring 205 Kanals 1 Marla.
2. Respondent No,2 has submitted his parawise comments and stated that as one of the accused- petitioners, i,e. Petitioner No,1 is a Government servant, sanction for his prosecution was awaited, the challan was complete which would soon be put up in the Court. On 10-6-1992 Police Station Directorate of Anti-Corruption Establishment, Punjab, Lahore vide F.I.R. No,28 on the complaint of one Muhammad Sadiq, Naib-Subedar registered a case under sections 419, 420, 468, 471, 218, P.P.C.
And section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The complainant Muhammad Sadiq had alleged that a fictitious power of attorney of his father Lal Din son of Fazal Din was got prepared, in which Fakhar Alam, petitioner, Muhammad Ismail son of Imam Din, Muhammad Iqbal son of Fazal Din were involved, and on 30-6-1991 a registered sale-deed was executed before the Sub- Registrar, Chunian, whereas the complainant's father had already died on 14-6-1991, and even in that case the forged bogus general power of attorney had become redundant. In the abovesaid preparation of forged general power of attorney, Sub-Registrar, Chunian and Registration Clerk, Chunian were also involved. It was alleged that on the basis of the fabricated general power of attorney, forged registered sale-deeds were prepared, and fraud had been committed with the complainant. It was further alleged that the abovesaid accused persons had manipulated general power of attorney in connivance with Fakhar Alam, Patwari petitioner. The sale-deed was registered in the name of Muhammad Ismail, whereas Muhammad Iqbal was made a so-called general power of attorney holder. The complainant also accused Muhammad Mazhar, Sub- Registrar, petitioner No,2 and Nisar Ahmad Khan, Registration Clerk, petitioner No,3.
3. It has been urged before me that F.I.R. No,633/91, dated 8-10-1991 registered at Police Station Chunian, District Kasur and F.I.R. No,28 dated 10-6-1992 lodged with the police station, Directorate Anti-Corruption Establishment, Punjab, Lahore, both arise out of the same incident not substantiated by law, be declared illegal, unlawful, mala fide, without jurisdiction and of no legal consequence and may be quashed. No doubt, the name of petitioner No,1 Fakhar Alam figures in both the F.I.Rs, and there is also mention of the transfer of the land of the late Lal Din, father of complainant of second F.I.R. But it has been specifically mentioned that Lal Din had already died on 14-6-1991, i,e. Earlier than 30-6-1991 when the forgedregistered sale-deeds were got prepared. In F.I.R. No,633/1991, nine/ten accused persons including petitioner No,1 were named, whereas in F.I.R.
No,28, the petitioner Fakhar Alam, Muhammad Mazhar, Nisar Ahmad Khan, Muhammad Ismail and Muhammad Iqbal were recorded, and also legal action against the other concerned accused found involved is mentioned. In F.I.R. No,28, Sub-Registrar, Chunian (petitioner No,2) and Muhammad Nisar Khan, Registration Clerk (petitioner No,3) alongwith the petitioner Fakhar Alam Patwari are Government servants. The names of the accused detailed in F.I.R. No,633/91 are not totally specified in the second F.I.R. No,28. The latter F.I.R. Was also registered under section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The complainants of both the F.I.Rs, are different. In the second F.I.R. It has been specifically written that Lal Din had already expired earlier to the registration of alleged sale-deeds on the basis of forged general power of attorney. The Anti- Corruption Establishment is competent to proceed, if prima fade some public servant is found involved in fraud and forgery.
4. It is the duty of the police to register a case on the receipt of complaint, if some cognizable offence is made out. The abovesaid two F.I.Rs, disclosed commission of cognizable offences separately. The police is also duty bound to investigate the matter and arrive at a correct conclusion and get the accused punished for their crime, if proved otherwise. The upshot of the above discussion is that the writ petition has no merit and is dismissed with no order as to costs.