MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN Versus STATE

ORDER

It was through a detailed order passed by me on 14-7-1993 in Criminal Miscellaneous No.1875/BC of 1993 that I had recalled the bail allowed to Muhammad Hussain and Fazal Din petitioners herein which bail had been granted to them by the learned Sessions Court. Their release, on bail, is now being sought through the present petition essentially on the ground that` the complainant party of case F.I.R. No.145/93 of Police Station Bhai Pheru had executed an Iqrarnama on 16-7-1993 declaring there through inter alia that Fazal Din was empty-handed during the occurrence in question.

2. On the last date of hearing i.e. on 2-11-1993, when this matter came up for hearing after notice; Mr. C.M. Latif Rawn, Advocate entered appearance on behalf of the complainant and denied the execution of the above-mentioned Iqrarnama. He added that Saeed D.S.P. who was investigating a murder case bearing F.I.R. No.292/93 registered with respect to the abduction and subsequent death of one Muhammad Iqbal who was a son of Muhammad Akbar, a co-accused of the present petitioners' and in which case, the members of the complainant party of the present murder case were the accused persons that on the last day of the investigation of this case, the said D.S.P. fraudulently obtained signatures and thumb-impressions of the members of the present complainant party giving impression that it was for the purpose of the murder case of the above-mentioned murder of the son of Akbar used of the present case.

3. The document in question which is essentially the basis for the present petition, was thus vehemently controverted by the complainant party. I summoned the D.S.P. who was investigating this case and who had got this document signed from the parties.

4. He is present and states that according to his investigation the son of Akbar accused whose death was the subject-matter of F.I.R. No.292/93 had in fact died by drowning and he had, therefore, discharged the accused persons of the said murder case who were the members of the present complainant party and that simultaneously he had also called upon the complainant party of the present case to take oath about the guilt or innocence of the accused persons of the murder case which is the subject-matter of the present petition and that it was in pursuance of that oath that the document in question had been executed by the members of the complainant party of this case.

5. As has been noticed above this document is being seriously disputed by the complainant party. It is not possible for me to give a finding during the course of the present proceedings regarding the veracity, and genuineness of the document in question which was got executed by the D.S.P./I.O. and in the circumstances, I do not consider it appropriate to place any reliance on this document for the purpose of re-considering the above-mentioned order passed by me on the bail matter of the present petitioners.

6. Consequently, this petition is dismissed.

7. Before parting with this petition, I would like to observe that I have not been able to appreciate the conduct of the D.S.P. as also the tendency of such like other Police Officers who based their investigations on the statements allegedly made by the parties before them on some alleged oath. The object of the investigation is collection of evidence and not determination, by the I.O., of the guilt or innocence of the accused persons. It has been repeatedly held by this Court on a number of earlier occasions that such a conduct on the part of the I.Os. is not in accord with the letter and spirit of the Cr.P.C. It is only to avoid their obligation that the I.Os. resort to such like method which is not only illegal but also leads to complications at the trial and at other stages.

N.H.Q./M-1296/L Bail refused.