AYESHA KHALID vs I.O., NAZIR A. CHAUDHRY
This matter arises from applications filed by the applicant alleging improper police investigation and mishandling of her criminal case involving allegations against her relatives over property disputes, wherein the police submitted a report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 classifying the matter as B-Class. The core legal question concerned the proper scrutiny and disposal of the police report by the Magistrate and the grievances regarding the categorization of the offence. The Sindh High Court held that police officials are duty-bound to submit their investigation report and it falls upon the Magistrate to decide whether to accept the report or issue appropriate directions. The Court directed the learned Magistrate to examine the matter, hear the applicant, and pass a reasoned order on the police report within one month. Additionally, the Court addressed the non-compliance of its order by the Magistrate regarding requisitioned comments on allegations of demanding money for copies, directing the M.I.T-I to seek an explanation.
- Is a Magistrate empowered to decide whether to accept a police report submitted under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 or issue other directions?
- What is the procedure when a police investigation report classifies a case as B-Class and is presented before the Magistrate?
- Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 365-A, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. ' MUNIB AHMAD KHAN, J.---In terms of the order passed in both these applications certain, directions were issued. In response thereto Jaffar Baloch, P.I./S.I.O., on behalf of S.S.P. Investigation, Ch. Nazeer Ahmed, S.-I. City Court, Police Station Saddar, T-II, Zone-I, C.C.P., Karachi and S.I.P. Ali Gohar Soomro, Preedy along with Afsheen Aman, State counsel, Investigating Officer Ch. Nazir Ahmed, submits that previously the investigation was with Ali Gohar Soomro and thereafter it has been assigned to him and he has investigated the matter. He submits that the matter was taken up with the D.I.-G. And two S.S.Ps. Zone-II, while another meeting, participated by D.I.-G.
2. Investigation, S.S.P., A.V.C., and S.P. A.C.L.U. And in all these meetings the contention of the applicant has been rejected. He submits that since he has already investigated the matter and submitted a report under section 173, Cr.P.C., wherein he has described the case as falls in B-Class, therefore, now it is the issue before the learned Magistrate to pass an order on that. They also submit an application along with order of Sessions Judge as well as outcome of the meetings. He further submits that once the matter has also taken up before the Sessions Judge but contention of the applicant was rejected.
3. Even after above situation the applicant submits that her matter has not properly been scrutinized by the police officials as well as by the Magistrate and that her case falls under section 365-A, P.P.C., while it has been dealt with under section 365-A, and that the Magistrate has wrongly entertained the police report.
4. ' It is being observed that the officials are duty bound to submit their report after investigation and it will be the Magistrate to decide as to whether under the given circumstances the said report is to be accepted or some other direction to the issued to the police officials. During the course of arguments it has come on record that the applicant is levelling allegation against her real uncle and aunt, who according to Ch. Nazeer Ahmed, Investigating Officer are aged persons. The applicant states that since the property is involved, therefore, they are after her. The learned Magistrate is directed to look into the matter and after hearing the applicant to pass an order on the police report which has been submitted and to pass an order within one month. Both the Cr. Tr.
5. As well as the Miscellaneous Application stand disposed of.
6. ' It has further been noted that on the complaint of the applicant that the Magistrate and his officials are demanding money for issuance of the copies, comments were asked by this Court from the Magistrate, but today no comments have been received. In the circumstances, noncompliance of the order of this Court amounts to negligence on the part of the Magistrate, therefore, M.I.T-I, is directed to seek explanation from the Magistrate and if he finds that reply is not satisfactory then place it before the Court. .