MUHAMMAD ASHRAF Versus State
This criminal petition arises from a criminal case registered under the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979, following a police raid on the petitioner's workshop where indigenous liquor was allegedly recovered and the petitioner purportedly escaped. The core legal question concerns the validity of the criminal proceedings and investigation based on a allegedly fabricated complaint and false recovery record prepared by the investigating officer due to a prior personal grudge. The Lahore High Court held that the proceedings were an abuse of the process of law because the complaint was neither signed nor written by the complainant police officer, key statements were missing, and the recovery memos contained glaring discrepancies indicative of a false record. Consequently, the court converted the petition into one under section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 and quashed the entire proceedings, laying down the principle that criminal proceedings vitiated by fabricated police records and mala fide implication will be quashed to prevent an abuse of the court's process.
- Can criminal proceedings be quashed under section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 if the investigation and complaint are found to be fabricated?
- Does a complaint that lacks the complainant's signature and is not in their handwriting constitute a valid complaint in the eye of law?
- Whether proceedings can be quashed when a police officer plants a false recovery out of personal animosity?
- Article 3, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 1979
- Article 4, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 1979
- Section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 561-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
SH. ABDUL RASHID, J.--- Case F.I.R. No.129 of 2004, dated 10-5-2004 under Article 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979, was registered at Police Station B-Division, Okara on the report of Muhammad Ashraf Ranjha, S.-I. of Police Station A-Division, Okara with the allegations that on 10-5-2004 while he was investigating case F.I.R. No. .169 of 2004 of his Police Station, he learnt that in the petitioner's workshop indigenous liquor was being distilled and sold and consequently he raided the said premises where besides the petitioner, Muhammad, Ishtiaq, Muhammad Arshad and Muhammad Anwar co-accused were also present. The petitioner was able to make good his escape and from the premises 57 plastic cans of indigenous liquor were recovered and the said liquor was taken into possession vide recovery memo. which was attested by the police officials. From the custody of one of the co-accused Rs.180 as sale proceeds were also taken into possession.
2. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that a brother of the petitioner, namely, Mahmood Ali was earlier taken into illegal confinement by Muhammad Ashraf Ranjha Sub-Inspector and the petitioner had filed Criminal Miscellaneous No. 118-H of 2001 and the said brother of the petitioner had been recovered from the illegal custody of the said Sub-Inspector and due to the said grouse the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this occurrence and that the police party allegedly comprised of many officials and in case the petitioner was present at the premises there was no chance of his escape and that on such allegations levelled against the petitioner any person can be implicated on account of grouse lurking in the mind of a police official.
3. I have perused the record. The complaint regarding occurrence had been allegedly recorded by Muhammad Ashraf Ranjha S.-I. of Police Station A-Division Okara who has admitted in the Court that the said complaint is not in his hand writing and that he got it recorded by Khurshid Ahmad S.-I. No statement of said Khurshid Ahmad S.-I. under section 161, Cr.P.C. is available on the file to show that he had recorded the complaint on the dictation of Muhammad Ashraf Ranjha S.-I. and further more the said complaint also does not bear the signatures of Muhammad Ashraf Ranjha S.-I. and as such does not constitute a complaint in the eye of law on the basis of which any case can be registered. Similarly the recovery memo. showing recovery of Rs.180 as sale proceeds of indigenous liquor is also not in hand-writing of Muhammad Ashraf S.-I. and he has only signed the same whereas according to the record the said recovery memo. is in his hand writing. The entire investigation in this case has been conducted without registration of the proper complaint and F.I.R. and then all the important recovery memos. are also not in the hand writing of Muhammad Ashraf Ranjha S.-I. He appears to have prepared a false record regarding recovery of indigenous liquor to implicate the present petitioner on account of his earlier grouse.
4. In this view of the matter by converting this petition into a petition under section 561-A, Cr.P.C., I quash the entire proceedings of this case. This petition is disposed of.
5. Rizwan Manzoor A.S.P. City Okara present in Court is directed to initiate legal proceedings against Muhammad Ashraf S.-I. for planting a false recovery of 57 plastic cans of indigenous liquor on the petitioner and his co-accused and preparing false record in this respect. The result of the action taken by the A.S.P. shall be intimated personally to this Court within two weeks.
N.H.Q./M-602/L Proceedings quashed.