' The relevant facts for the decision of this Constitutional petition are that case F.I.R. No,124 of 1996 was registered against the petitioner and others under section 302/34/109, P.P.C. With Police Station Changa Manga, District Kasur. The investigation was initially conducted by local police, thereafter, it was transferred to Bashir Baig, D.S.P., Pattoki and from whom to Shoaib Ahmad, Inspector Range Crime. The investigation thereafter was transferred to Asif Nawaz, S.P., Kasur and from him to Shaukat Hayat, D.S.P. Crime. The matter did not rest here. Thereafter, it was transferred to a team of three D.S.Ps. Namely Shaukat Hayat, Abdul Samad and Rai Abdullah. The authority still did not feel satisfied and transferred the investigation on 1-1-1998 to Sarfraz Mehmood Lodhi, D.S.P. Who completed the investigation and submitted the challah through the local S.H.O. On 24-8-1998. In the meanwhile respondent No,1 proceeded to transfer the investigation to Muhammad Zaman, S.P., Crime on 28-3-1998. It was ultimately brought to the notice of respondent No,1 that the challah has already been submitted in the Court, therefore, he proceeded to issue the impugned order, dated 10-8-1998 for withdrawing the investigation from Muhammad Zaman, S.P. Crime, who received this order on 15-8-1998. The other relevant factor is that Ahmad Din, co-accused of the petitioner, filed Writ Petition No,3013 of 1998 which came up for hearing before the Honorable Chief Justice on 20-2- 1998. The same was disposed of with the direction to expedite the investigation and conclude the same at the earliest. Then the complainant filed Writ Petition No,6095 of 1998. The same, also, came up for hearing before the Honorable Chief Justice on 15-5-1998. The writ was disposed of with the direction to S.P. Crime to conclude the investigation expeditiously preferably within one month.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that respondent No,1 illegally and mala fide proceeded to stop the investigation by Muhammad Zaman, S.P. Crime. The application, Annexure "D" on the basis of which respondent No,1 stopped the investigation by Muhammad Zaman, S.P. Crime was recommended by Rana Muhammad Iqbal Khan, Minister.
3. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate-General argued that the final report has been submitted in the Court as back as on 24-8-1998 after the conclusion of the investigation by Sarfraz Mehmood Lodhi, D.S.P., therefore, respondent No,1 legally proceeded to stop further investigation by Muhammad Zaman, S.P. Crime.
4. Ch. Muhammad Yaqoob Sabir, Advocate who appeared for the complainant/respondent No,4 argued that although the murder case was registered on 29-5-1996 yet the investigation was not concluded due to the influence of the petitioners and their co-accused. It is added that Mr. Arif Nakai, the then Chief Minister was sheltering the accused so desperately that even a D.O., dated 8- 10-1996 was sent from his office whereby change of investigation was approved from Range Crime to S.P., Kasur. It is added that the anxiety of the petitioners/accused is to keep the matter pending at the investigation stage.
5. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments and gone through the record.
The facts detailed in the opening paragraph of this judgment are just for the purpose to highlight carelessness and the callousness, which is now rule in the police rather than an exception. The investigation was transferred from one agency to the other and from one officer to the other in a mechanically, arbitrarily, capriciously and above all without application of mind. It is interesting to note that it has not been brought to the notice of this Court in spite of query that did the high ups including respondent No,1 take any action against any of the Investigating Officer for faulty investigation or for mixing up with either party or for failure to conclude the investigation efficiently.
There was none. This fact alone proved it beyond any shadow of doubt that there was no purpose to transfer the investigation except to please someone, may be the then Chief Minister.
5. It is worthwhile to mention here that transfer of investigation so casually was deprecated by the Honorable Supreme Court. It was observed that "this was a recent innovation and the purpose is mala fide'. In this behalf reference can be made to the judgment of the Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Muhammad Aslam and another v. Additional Secretary to Government of N.-W.F.P., Home and Tribal Affairs Department and 4 others PLD 1987 SC 103. The same view was reiterated by the Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Nasira Surriya v. Muhammad Aslam and 7 others 1990 SCM R 12.
7. The Honorable Supreme Court while commenting up the necessity of re-investigation in the case of Riaz Hussain and others v. The State 1986 SCM R 1934 held as under:- "The system of reinvestigation in criminal cases is a recent innovation which is always taken up at the instances of influential people and favorable reports obtained. This is no way assists the Courts in coming to a correct conclusion; it rather creates more complications to the Court administering justice."
8. The judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Muhammad Aslam (supra) is dated 25-11- 1986. This way about 12 years have passed but concerned authorities had failed to lay down the parameters for transfer of investigation. It is needless to add here that the law as declared by the Honorable Supreme Court is binding on all the functionaries of the Government in view of Article 187 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. There is large number of Constitutional petitions pending in this Court where the investigation has been transferred repeatedly even in theft cases. It seems that the concerned authorities are even ignorant of the provisions of Police Rules, 1974 on the point.
9. This evil can be, successfully, combated by making it incumbent upon the Authority transferring the investigation or ordering reinvestigation should comment upon the quality of the investigation and pinpoint the shortcomings or lapses made by the Investigating Officer. The Authority if convinced after going through the record that either the Investigation Officer is inefficient, incapable or mixed up with one of the parties for any reason and only then investigation may be transferred that too after recording reasons in writing. It shall propose action against Investigation Officer for misconduct, inefficiency and corruption as the case may be. That would be effective measures to check the illegal tendency of transferring the investigation or ordering reinvestigation without any study of the "Zimnis" and appreciating the efforts made by the Investigating Officer.
The honest and efficient investigation if the obligation of the State but concerned authorities are dealing with these matters as the sole purpose is to please the parties or their recommenders. This is main cause of delay in expeditious and just decision of criminal cases.
10. Now coming to the case in hand. This Court held that investigation subsequent to filing of the complete challan is uncalled for, unnecessary and must be avoided as it does not advance but retards the course of justice. In this behalf reference can be made to judgment in 1.-C.A. No,769 of 1997.
11. The allegations that the impugned order was made by respondent No,1 at the behest of Rana Muhammad Iqbal, a Provincial Minister are incorrect on the face of it because somebody has just noted the name in the margin. It may be a trick to prejudice the Court.
12. The upshot of this discussion is that there is no merit in this writ petition. The same is dismissed.
Let copy of this judgment be sent to Secretary Home, Government of Punjab to ensure that parameters for transfer of investigation as well as reinvestigation are laid for the guidance of respondent No,1 and his subordinates.