Mst. KANEEZ FATIMA Versus S.H.O. Police Station Mughalpura, And Other

ORDER

AHMAD SAEED AWAN, J.- Learned counsel states that an application was moved to the SHO for registration of a case on 10.10.1994 and later on Writ Petition No. 13608/94 was filed by the petitioner for seeking direction from this Court. On 17.11.1994 the SHO was directed that if the complaint of the petitioner discloses commission of a cognizable offence, he shall proceed further in accordance with law. Learned counsel contends that instead of registering the case the SHO got the signatures of the petitioner as well the paternal uncle for compromise and also got illegal gratification.

2.The SHO states that the case has been registered against the accused on 8.12.1994 and is under investigation. It is alleged that Inspite of repeated requests, the attitude of the police is not in accordance with, law towards the petitioner. The SHO being a creature of the Statute is bound to act in accordance with law. The petitioner may however repeat his request, if his grievance still persists. With this direction, this petition stands disposed of.