' Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 10-8-1998 the bailiff has submitted his report, the crux of which is that the detenu was found locked by the C.I.A. Police officials and that as per police official Ghulam Rasool, Sub-Inspector respondent No,3, he was arrested for the reason that he had produced certain forged document during the investigation of case F.I.R. No,53 of 1998 of which he was a complainant.
2. Ch. Abdur Rasheed, Advocate has tendered his power of attorney just now on behalf of respondent No,4. He stated that the act of the police official was justified and he had obtained physical remand of the detenu till today.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that all this was illegal. He tendered certified copy of the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore in relation to petition for cancellation of bail allowed to respondent No,4 and her absconding husband wherein it was directed that the investigation of this case will not be conducted by Ghulam Rasool, Sub-Inspector, respondent No,3 here and it should be done by a D.S.P. Learned counsel further stated that the learned Additional Sessions Judge made certain observation about the conduct of the police official and stated that there was a clear collusion between the police and the main beneficiary of the forgery."
4. After going through the order of learned Additional Sessions Judge coupled with the fact that it was the duty of the Police Official investigating the case F.I.R. No,53 of 1998 of which the detenu was a complainant, that if he had found the case to be baseless, he should have made a report to the Court concerned about conclusion and sought for discharge of the accused whereafter action against the complainant could be taken.
5. The Police Official manifestly has not adopted the correct procedure and has not acted in consonance with the Code of Criminal Procedure by arresting the complainant of the case F.I.R.
No,53 of 199P during the investigation and it also appears that the learned Magistrate giving remand also did not apply his mind to the facts of this case. Nonetheless, the remand is over today and as observed earlier, the procedure adopted the Police Official respondent No,3 was totally unwarranted, therefore, the petition is accepted and the detenu released. The detenu is at liberty to take action available under the law, if he so wanted, on account of this detention.