KHAN RIAZ UD DIN AHMAD, J.- Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a case FIR No. 154 of 15.6.1992 under section 322/109 Qisas & Diyat Ordinance and section 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, was registered at P.S. Garh Maharaja against Nasir Ali etc. And the petitioner and her husband were stated to be accused of conspiracy in the crime; that after due investigation, the petitioner and her husband were declared innocent, while Nasir and Irshad were challaned to court to face their trial under section 320 of the Qisas & Diyat Ordinance.
2. It is further submitted that to perpetrate the agony of the petitioner the investigation of the case stands transferred under the orders of D.I.G. Police to S.P. Range Crimes, Faisalabad. The learned counsel submits that the said order dated 29.7.1992 is unwarranted, as it will open the investigation afresh, in spite of the fact that the challan has already been put in court. He has laid great emphasis on the point that after the report under section 173 Cr.P.C., no fresh investigation could be undertaken by the police. He relies on Asghar Ali vs. The State (1983 P.Cr.L.J. 2187) and Din Muhammad Shakir alias D.M. Shakir vs. DSP. Ichhra.. Lahore (PLD 1977 Lahore 180).
3. I have given my anxious consideration to the contentions- of the learned counsel but I have not been able to persuade myself to agree with him. The authorities cited by the learned counsel deal with the cases, which were cancelled by the courts and the facts mentioned therein were materially different from that of the case in hand.
4. I may not be wrong in making observation that the police would be competent to carry out multiple investigation, even after submission of the challan. Reference in this behalf could be made to Atta Muhammad vs. I.G. Police reported as PLD 1965 Lahore 734. It would also be helpful if in this context PLJ 1973 Lahore 396 is also taken note of. It was observed therein that after submission of challan, police may still make further instigations, and the position will not change even if cognizance of offence already taken by the court and recording of evidence commenced.
Being fortified in my view by the above said authorities, I find no substance in this writ petition and proceed to dismiss the same in limine.