1. ' I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned AA.-G. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in view of Punjab Anti-Corruption Rules, 1985, only special police could register a case and investigate. Argued that the petitioner's right has been seriously prejudiced, because had the Anti-Corruption Establishment Police registered a case, it would have considered the feasibility of departmental inquiry as well. Learned AA.-G. Has opposed the petition with the submissions that the Rules have been framed under Anti-Corruption Establishment Ordinance, 1961, according to which the Ordinance is in addition to the law already occupying the field. Submits that in these circumstances, local police is competent to investigate. Argued that the entire prosecution evidence had been recorded and trial was adjourned number of times to afford opportunity to the petitioner to produce defence evidence and now last opportunity has been granted.
2. I have heard the learned counsel at length and gone through the file. Since the trial is near completion, therefore, the petition is being disposed of with the observations that the petitioner shall agitate all the points before the trial Court, which shall decide the same after hearing arguments. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.