FAKHAR BEHZAD Versus STATE

ORDER

Case F.I.R. No.177 of 1989 was registered on 11-6-1989 at Police Station Raiwind Saddar under section il of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. On an application for the production of the abductee moved before Mr. Mukhtar Ali Mann, Resident Magistrate Kot Radha 1Cishan, she was produced from Darul Aman, Lahore and her statement recorded.

2. This was considered as breach of Rule 18(a) of Paragraph 26 of the Police Rules by Muhammad Shafi, Sub-Inspector, the Incharge Police Post, Kot Radha Kishan, and feeling heavy and aggrieved from the conduct of Magistrate, his Naib-Court and the Advocate who had moved the application, report was entered in the daily diary by Habib Khan A.S.I. This was derogatory to the conduct of the Magistrate who reported the matter to the learned Sessions Judge and he in turn forwarded the case to the High Court.

3. Contempt of Court notices were issued to the three contemners, police officials, namely, Qasim Ali, Moharrir Head Constable, Habib Khan, A.S.i. and Muhammad Shaft, Sub-Inspector Incharge of the Police Post.

4. On 3-3-1992 my learned brother then dealing with the case took note of the fact that respondents contemners were trying to obtain forgiveness from Mr. Mukhtar Ali Mann, Magistrate. The request for adjournment in this behalf was allowed though it was observed that forgiveness by the Magistrate cannot be considered the guarantee for the acquittal.

5. The statement of Qasim Ali, Head Constable has already been recorded. According to his statement he recorded the report (the offending one) at the instance of Muhammad Shafi, Sub-Inspector and it was signed by Habib Khan, A.S.I. Even the written reply of Habib Khan, A.S.I. is that he had made the entry (by signing it) at the instance of the Sub-Inspector. Reading the statement and the reply of Habib Khan it is abundantly clear that the offending report in the daily diary of the police post was recorded on the direct order of Muhammad Shafi, Sub-Inspector. The Sub-Inspector has admitted his fault today in writing and has thrown himself at the mercy of the Court.

6. The contemner Sub-Inspector has about more than 30 years service and is now in the final stage of service career. He has also been attending the Court in the contempt proceedings for about four years. In view of these facts #4 unqualified apology tendered by him is accepted particularly when he has already been forgiven by the Magistrate. In view of this conclusion the other two contemners do not seem to have committed any contempt as whatever they had done was under the order of the Sub-Inspector. Hence notice issued against them is discharged.

N.H.Q./S-475/L Notice discharged.