MUMTAZ HUSSAIN vs SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (OPERATIONS), LAHORE and another
The petitioner, a former Sub-Inspector of Police, challenged his dismissal from service following departmental proceedings regarding his alleged involvement in a murder case. Although the petitioner was accused of accompanying individuals to a hotel where a murder occurred and returning with them, he argued that his subsequent exoneration during the police investigation rendered the penalty of dismissal disproportionate. The Punjab Service Tribunal upheld the dismissal, leading to the current petition for leave to appeal before the Supreme Court. The core legal question was whether the findings of misconduct by departmental authorities and the Tribunal warranted interference by the Supreme Court under its constitutional jurisdiction. The Supreme Court held that the concurrent findings of guilt regarding the petitioner's misconduct, based on the Inquiry Officer's report, were factual in nature. Consequently, the Court determined that the matter did not attract the provisions of Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The petition was dismissed, affirming that the Supreme Court will not interfere with concurrent factual findings of service tribunals in the absence of a substantial question of law.
- Does the Supreme Court have jurisdiction under Article 212(3) of the Constitution to interfere with concurrent factual findings of a Service Tribunal regarding departmental misconduct?
- Is a police officer's exoneration in a criminal investigation sufficient to overturn a dismissal from service based on departmental findings of misconduct?
- Article 212(3), Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
' FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J.--- The petitioner, a former Sub-Inspector of Police, was proceeded against departmentally on serious allegations of accompanying other persons to a hotel where they committed murder of one Khalid Mehmood and then brought them back. He was dismissed from service on 10-11-2005 by the respondent No,
1. His departmental appeal was also declined by the Capital City Police Officer, Lahore, vide order, dated 22-12-2005. Therefore, he preferred Service Appeal No,256 of 2006 which was also dismissed by the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore vide impugned judgment, dated 23-6-2006. Hence this petition for leave to appeal.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that the petitioner had been exonerated of his involvement in the murder case as a consequence of police investigation and that the extreme penalty of dismissal from service was not called for in the facts and circumstances of the case.
3. We have heard the learned counsel at length and have also perused the available record with his assistance. Admittedly, the petitioner went to the place of occurrence in the company of the co-accused to a hotel where they committed murder of Khalid Mehmood deceased and also came back in their company after commission of offence. The departmental authorities as well as the Tribunal have concurrently found the petitioner to be guilty of misconduct in the light of the report of the Inquiry Officer. The case involving factual controversy does not attract provisions of Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan so as to warrant interference by this Court. Even otherwise this is not a fit case for grant of leave to appeal.
4. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in this petition which is dismissed and leave to appeal is refused accordingly.