MST. RASOOLAN BIBI Versus MAHMOOD

ORDER

Through the present habeas corpus petition, it had been submitted by Mst. Rasoolan Bibi petitioner that she, her husband Ali Muhammad (detenu), her son Fareed, her daughter Mst. Bashiran and her son-in-law Talib Hussain had been working as the servants of Mehmood respondent at his Dera for the last about 30 years; that about 8 months ago, Mehmood respondent got involved in a murder case alongwith some of his relatives and that the petitioner had heard that the members of the respondent's family were planning to kill some members of the petitioner's family and then to involve the complainant party of the murder case in which, Mehmood respondent had been involved in such a planned murder of some member of the petitioner's family; that in prosecution of the said conspiracy, an attempt had been made at the life of the husband of the petitioner who, however, escaped whereafter, the petitioner and his family abandoned village Chalianwala and shifted to Chak No.13/NB in District Sargodha; that on 7-11-1993 Mehmood respondent alongwith his brother-in-law Khalid reached Kot Momin Road Chowk in a car and after forcibly lifting the husband of the petitioner (Ali Muhammad detenu), fled away and that the petitioner had approached the police of Police Station Bhalwal but no action was taken in the matter. The petitioner has consequently prayed that a bailiff of this Court be deputed to recover her husband, namely, Ali Muhammad detenu from the custody of Mehmood respondent and be set at liberty.

2. A bailiff was deputed to recover the said detenu from the said custody who returned to report that the detenu in question was stated to be in jail in pursuance of his alleged involvement in two cases bearing F.I.R. No.250 and F.I.R. No.346 of 1993 of Police Station Saddar Mandi Bahauddin and who had been arrested on 12-11-1993 in pursuance of the said cases.

3. I directed the production of Ali Muhammad detenu from jail and also directed the production of record of the above-mentioned two cases before this Court.

4. The detenu and the record have been produced.

5. As per the above-mentioned F.I.R. No.250/93, it had been alleged by one Shehbaz that Ali Muhammad detenu and some other members of his family nominated therein were his servants who had disappeared from his Dera and had taken away 20 heads of goats; 40 bags of fertilizer; 20 bags of wheat seed; a starter of the tube-well; an electric fan; 4 cots with beds and a licensed rifle. This F.I.R. had been registered on 14-7-1993 for the alleged commission of an offence punishable under section 381, P.P.C. while the alleged occurrence had taken place on the night between the 7th and 8th of July, 1993.

6. On my inquiry, the I.O. states that this Shehbaz complainant is a Mamunzad of Mehmood respondent of the present case and that out of the long list of the alleged stolen articles, only a rifle above-mentioned had been recovered. According to the recovery memo dated 12-11-1993, it was one Ghulam Mehmood who, according to Abdul Majeed S.I. present in Court, is the respondent in the present petition who had produced this .7 mm rifle and this Ghulam Mehmood while so producing the same stated that he had recovered it from the possession of Ali Muhammad detenu.

7. I am surprised, that on such an alleged recovery, when the rifle in question had not been found on the person of the said Ali Muhammad detenu nor had the I.O. found the same to be in possession or in the custody of the said detenu, a further case bearing F.I.R. No.346/93 had been registered against Ali Muhammad detenu for the alleged commission of offence punishable under section 13 of Arms Ordinance of 1965.

8. As the above-mentioned two cases are still under investigation, I am exercising restraint in expressing any final opinion about the veracity of the same. Nevertheless, I feel compelled to observe that the conduct of local police of Police Station Mandi Bahauddin in registering these two cases and arresting Ali Muhammad detenu, is open to serious exceptions and the possibility of these two cases having been registered at the instance of Mehmood respondent of the present case for ulterior motive, cannot be ruled out.

9. At this stage, on an oral petition made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and after notice to the learned A.A.-G., Ali Muhammad detenu is admitted to bail in case F.I.R. No.250/93 of Police Station Saddar Mandi 8 Bahauddin as also in case F.I.R. No.346/93 of the same police station, subject to his furnishing security in the sum of Rs.5,000 in each case with two sureties each in the like amount in each case to the satisfaction of A.C./Duty Magistrate, Mandi Bahauddin. Copy Dasti.

10. In view of the reasons above stated, I feel persuaded to direct the D.I.-G. of Gujranwala Range, to withdraw the investigation of these two cases from the local police of Police Station Saddar Mandi Bahauddin and to entrust the same to some senior officer, preferably Mr. Hussain Asghar, the Additional S.P. of Gujrat.

11. A copy of this order shall be immediately sent to the D.I: G. Police of Gujranwala Range for information and compliance.

12. Mr. Zaeem-ul-Farooq Malik, Assistant Advocate-General has also been asked to convey this order to the said D.I.-G. for compliance.

13. I am informed that Mehmood respondent who was involved in a murder case arising out of F.I.R. No.163/90 of Police Station Mandi Bahauddin has since been released on bail. I would like to examine the record of this case as also the bail granting order.

14. Abdul Majeed, S.I. present in Court has been directed to produce this record before this Court on the next date of hearing.

15. To come up on 4-12-1993.

N.H.Q./R-113/K ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition accepted.