DIL SHAD ISLAM Versus PUNJAB PROVINCE

On the report lodged by Sub-Divisional Officer, Highways Sub-Division 11, Lahore on the 25th of September 1974 at Police Station, Qila Gujjar Singh a case under section 380, P. P. C. was registered on the allegation that three Measurement Books had been removed by somebody from the office record. The petitioner was also suspected to be one of the accused persons. He was admitted to bail. He has now filed this petition praying that the investigation in the case be ordered to be quashed and the action which the police has taken in this behalf should be declared as without lawful authority.

2. Learned counsel has placed on record a photostat of the application which respondent No. 2 submitted to the S. H. O. to contend that the investigation should have been filed after that. It is stated in the said application that the Measurement Books had been found by him from the office and they were lying under records. Respondent No. 2 has further stated in that application that he withdraws his complaint and no further action should be taken. This application, according to the counsel for the petitioner, was submitted on the 30th of September 1974. He complains that notwithstanding this application respondent No. 3 has been summoning the petitioner to the police station at odd hours and insisting upon him to sign a document, photostat of which is placed on the record. According to this document the petitioner was to undertake that he would not resort to any legal remedy which might be available to him for the illegal and wrongful action. The precise words were: "No case will be lodged anywhere by us." The petitioner is apprehensive that if steps are not taken, he may be forced to sign such a document.

3. Investigation is only an inquiry into the matter by the police in respect of the allegations which are made in the F.

1. R. recorded under section 154, Cr. P. C. and on the basis of which a case is registered. The police cannot adjudicate in these proceedings, nor does the finding of the police, one way or the other, affect the right or the liberty of the petitioner. After a case is registered, the officer incharge of the police station is under a statutory obligation to investigate under Chapter XIV of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and it is not competent to interfere with the investigation as held in Emperor v. Nazir Ahmad AIR 1945 P C 18 and M. S. Khawaja v. State P L D 1965 S C 287. There is, therefore, no question in declaring the investigation to be without lawful authority.

4. However, I may observe that when a police officer is investigating a case, he cannot act arbitrarily, capriciously and whimsically. He is as much bound by law as any other person and if his actions are not warranted, by law, they can be declared as without lawful authority. He takes hi authority to investigate under the Criminal Procedure Code, the Police Act and the Rules made thereunder. He cannot summon a witness just by verbal orders and ask him to be present before him or in the police station. The law has taken care of such a situation and has ensured that the persons may not be harassed by the police officers. It is provided in rule 25.2 of Police Rules, 1934 (Volume III), Part IV:

"25.2. Powers of Investigating Officers.-(1) The powers and privileges of a police officer making an investigation are detailed in sections 160 to 175, Criminal Procedure Code.

An officer so making an investigation shall invariably issue an order in writing in Form 25.2 (1) to any person summoned to attend such investigation and shall endorse on the copy of the order retained by the person so summoned the date and time of his arrival at, and the date and time of his departure from, the place to which he is summoned. The duplicate of the order shall be attached to the case diary.

(2) No avoidable trouble shall be given to any person from whom enquiries are made and no person shall be unnecessarily detained.

(3) it is the duty of an Investigating Officer to find out the truth of the matter under investigation. His object shall be to discover the actual facts of the case and to arrest vie real offender or offenders. He shall not commit himself prematurely to any view of the facts for or against any person."

I have, however, noticed in a number of cases that the Investigating officers do not act in conformity wish the provisions of this rule. They just detail a constable and ask anybody to be present before them. The fear of the policeman is so enormous in the mind of the people that they without pro testing and reacting to such verbal orders readily obey them. The dignity of the man is ensured in the Constitution and if the police officer were to i conduct an inquiry in a manner which causes a witness an unnecessary worry or humiliation, it will be an act contrary to law and the Constitution. A Police Officer has to observe the Police Rules strictly, otherwise he becomes liable for damages to the person who may be subjected by him to any illegal act. In the circumstances, the petitioner should have no worry on the score that he is being called in the police station off and on, and at odd hours. He should insist on the police official who comes to call him to produce an order in writing, as required under rule 25.2 of the Police Rules. If such an order is not shown, the petitioner will be under no obligation to go to the police station.

5. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

S. A. H. Order accordingly.