' Brief facts are that Manzoor Ahmad earlier sent an application to the S.P., Khanewal wherein he alleged that the petitioners who are wife and husband inter se murdered his father Abdul Latif. This application was forwarded to the District Magistrate, Khanewal wherein the permission for disinterment of the dead body was sought in order to know the real cause of death. The learned District Magistrate vide his order, dated 13-4-1995 directed the Assistant Commissioner, Khanewal to inquire into the matter and submit his report. The Assistant Commissioner deputed Malik Ghulam Farid, Ilaqa Magistrate to do the same job. The learned Magistrate submitted the report wherein he recommended the exhumation of the dead body of the deceased. On 5-7-1995 the grave was disinterred under the supervision of Malik Ghulam Farid learned Magistrate but it was found that it was the dead body of a female.
2. Man7oor Ahmad, thereafter sent another application to the Chief Secretary, Government of the Punjab, Lahore for the exhumation of the dead body of Abdul Latif and to constitute a Medical Board for conducting postmortem examination. That application was transmitted to the learned Ilaqa Magistrate to supervise the exhumation proceeding after ensuring the proper identification of the grave wherein the deceased was buried. The petitioner feeling dissatisfied with this process filed a revision petition in the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Khanewal but the same was dismissed vide order, dated 9-8-1995. Hence this writ petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the order passed by the learned District Magistrate for the exhumation of the dead body of Abdul Latif was unlawful on the following grounds:--
(i) That the petitioners were not associated with the inquiry earlier conducted by Mr. Ghulam Farid, Magistrate before the exhumation of dead body.
(ii) That the inquiry earlier conducted could not be termed as judicial inquiry although it was a condition precedent before the dead body was caused to be disinterred and examined. He places reliance on Khizar Hayat and others v. District Magistrate and others PLD 1995 Lah. 433, Ghulam Hussain v. District Magistrate, Muzafargarh and 3 others 1992 PCr.LJ 1870 and Muhammad Anwar v.
District Magistrate, Sahiwal and others 1991 PCr.LJ 806.
' That the second inquiry under sections 166 and 174, Cr.P.C. Could not be held when similar inquiry has already been made.
(iv) That the deceased was died on 5.2.1995, and the exhumation at this stage will not serve any useful purpose.
4. This Court directed the petitioner to place on the file certified copy of the inquiry report submitted by Malik Ghulam Farid City, Magistrate, Police Station Sadar, Khanewal before the District Magistrate, Khanewal. However, subsequently it transpired that the inquiry report was available in the office.
5. I have heard both the learned counsel at length and perused the record carefully.
6. The perusal of the file indicates that Wazir Khan petitioner. No,2 was associated with the inquiry and his statement was also recorded. Obviously under these circumstances the statement of petitioner No,1 who was his wife was not necessary as the interest of Mst. Ghazala Begum was not adverse to Wazir Khan. So far as the second contention is concerned, it is of no substance. The inquiry held by the learned Magistrate was a judicial one. The petitioner had notice of this inquiry, therefore, the reference to abovementioned cases was of no avail to him. The statement of one of the petitioners was also recorded and he was also present at the time when the dead body was exhumed. In the presence of previous inquiry, there was no need to hold the second one. Since during the disinterment, the dead body was found that of a female, therefore, it was proper that during the disinterment the presence of respondent No,3 Manzoor Ahmad was ensured. The contention that exhumation at this stage will serve no useful purpose pales into significance for the sole reason that there is no time limit for the disinterment of the body. Modi in his Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology in Chapter IV opines:-- "In India and in England, no time-limit is fixed for the disinterment of a body. In France, this period is limited to ten years and it is thirty years in Germany."
Reliance can be placed on Muhammad Ramzan and others v. The State and another 1987 SCMR 272 wherein the objection of such nature was overruled observing that disinterment can take place even after one year to ascertain the cause of death.
7. In view of above Malik Ghulam Farid learned Magistrate and in case he was not available, his successor will disinter the dead body of Abdul Latif for post-mortem examination after joining the petitioners and Manzoor Ahmad respondent No,3 son of the deceased, soon after the receipt of this order and complete the whole process within a fortnight.