The petitioner through this writ petition under Article 199 of the Constitution seeks that respondent No. l be directed to register a case against respondents Nos.2 to 8; to recover 20 Tolas golden jewellery and cash Rs.25,000 looted by them; further it is prayed that the respondent No.2 be ordered to undertake an enquiry in case F.I.R. No.59 of 1996 registered with Police Station Gargakh District, Gujranwala.
2. According to the petitioner, on 6-4-1996, at about 8 p.m. Respondent No.2 alongwith respondents 3 to 8 raided the house of the petitioner; undertook search of the house; during search of house respondent No.2 Malik Nadeem S.I./S.H.O. Picked up 20 Tolas golden jewellery and cash of Rs.25,000 under the threat of killing or violence; the petitioner's husband was subjected tophysical torture and relatives of the petitioner who had tried to interfere were also mishandled; the petitioner's husband was forcibly abducted by the respondents Nos.2 to 8; a false case was got registered against the petitioner on 8-4-1996 vide F.I.R. No.59 of 1996 aforementioned under section 9-B(iii), Control of Narcotic Substances Ordinance, 1995. The petitioner allegedly moved an application on 9-4-1996 to respondent No. l for registration of F. I. R. Against the respondents but no action was taken; hence this petition.
3. As per report and parawise comments of the police station Gargakh, Gujranwala; a case F.I.R.
No.59/96 dated 8-4-1996 under section 9-B(iii) Control of Narcotic Substances Ordinance, 1995 was registered against the husband of the petitioner from whom 724 grams of heroin purchased through a fake customer; sale products amounting to Rs.635 and a small scale weights of various types were recovered from his person including signed currency notes of the denomination of Rs.275 handed over to Constable No.705 to purchase heroin from the petitioner's husband.
4. Further as per report; three cases under Article 3/4 Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order No.4, 1979 also stand registered against the petitioner vide case F.I.R. No.300/92, 339/92 and case F.I.R.
No.153/94; a case F.I.R. No.43/93 under section 7 of the Gambling Act, 1978 also stands registered against the petitioner's husband besides the aforementioned cases against him.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at length and have perused the parawise comments submitted by the respondent No.2.
6. Admittedly cases under Articles 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 4, 1979 stand registered against the petitioner; the petitioner's husband is involved in case F.I.R. No.59/96 dated 8-4-1996 wherein 735 grams of heroin was recovered from him in a well planned raid and is also involved in another case under section 7 of the Gambling Act, 1978.
7. True; it is the statutory duty of the police to investigate into the commission of a cognizable offence on the basis of a report having been made to that effect in case in hand nothing has been brought on record to prove that the petitioner in fact had reported the matter either to the S.H.O. Or to the respondent No. l; a huge quantity of heroin has been recovered from the petitioner's husband, who admittedly is an Ex-Constable of police department; the petition prima facie seems to be mala fide only to blackmail the respondents.
8. However, reporting the commission of cognizable offence to the police is not the only method for moving the machinery and the process of the law; the petitioner can resort in such a situation to section 190, Cr.P.C. Which lays down the conditions requisite for initiation of proceedings and deals with the cognizance of offences by Magistrate; which will certainly suit the petitioner under the circumstances.
9. In view of the dictum laid down by their Lordships of Supreme Court in case of Jamshad Ahmad v. Muhammad Akram Khan and another 1975 SCMR 149 that the High Court is under no obligation to order the registration of a case especially where the entire evidence to prove the alleged offence is in possession of the complainant; a complaint under section 190(a) Cr.P.C. Would be an adequate remedy.
10. For the abovementioned reasons; I find there is no merit in this petition.