Faqir Muhammad petitioner No his the father of Muhammad Ashraf, Muhammad Arshad and Muhammad Tahir, (petitioners Nos.2 to 4). His one son named as Munir Ahmad is said to be involved in some criminal cases. To procure his attendance the petitioners are allegedly being harassed by the D.S.P. C.I.A., Rahimyar Khan and the Inspector C.I.A., Sadiqabad. Feeling aggrieved they have filed this petition by expressing that they are not liable for the misdeeds of Munir Ahmad and that the respondents may be restrained from harassing them.
2. The comments have been received from the Superintendent of Police, Rahimyar Khan wherein he has intimated that Munir Ahmad son of Faqir Muhammad (petitioner No.1) is wanted in case F.I.R.
No.391 of 1993 registered under section 379, P.P.C. At Police Station Sadar, Khanpur in which a motorcycle was stolen. It is mentioned in the comments that the raid was effected for the arrest of Munir Ahmad when his father Faqir' Muhammad petitioner No.1 promised to produce him before the police. It is also narrated therein that no harassment has been practised upon Faqir Muhammad petitioner No.1 who was rather politely asked to produce his son Munir Ahmad. In the end it has been prayed that the writ petition may be dismissed.
3. After going through the comments I have to express my surprise on the prayer/request made by the Superintendent of Police, Rahimyar Khan for the dismissal of this petition. He has himself admitted that all the four petitioners are not required by the police in any criminal case. This being the position, they cannot be harassed by the police. It seems that Munir Ahmad accused of case F.I.R. No391/93 registered at Police Station Sadar, Khanpur under section 379, P.P.C. Is a disobedient son and for his misdeeds, if any, his father and his brothers cannot be held responsible who need not go through any ordeal. I am tempted to record that our Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) in his Famous Address known as "Khutbatul Widah" has very kindly expressed that no person is responsible for the deed(s) of any other person. The father is not responsible for the acts of his son and vice versa the son is not responsible for the acts of his father. Seeking guidance from the aforesaid kind words, I hold that the police/respondents are not competent and have no jurisdiction to harass the four petitioners on the basis of their own conjectural hypothesis.
4. Consequently I accept this writ petition and direct the police (respondents) not to harass the petitioners. No order as to costs.