Pakistan Case LawWARIS KHAN Versus The INSPECTORGENERAL OF POLICE, N.W.F.P., PESHAWAR and another
The petitioner, an Inspector of Police, sought leave to appeal against the dismissal of his service appeal by the N.-W.F.P. Service Tribunal. The petitioner was proceeded departmentally for making a false statement before a Speedy Trial Court, which defamed a Senior Police Officer, and was subsequently found guilty of negligence and inefficiency, resulting in his compulsory retirement from service by the Deputy Inspector-General of Police. His departmental appeal before the Inspector-General of Police was also dismissed, leading to the unsuccessful service appeal. Before the Supreme Court, the petitioner contended that the evidence had been misread and that the penalty imposed was excessive. The core legal question concerned the re-appraisal of evidence and the proportionality and justifiability of the penalty of compulsory retirement. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to re-appraise the evidence on record and to consider whether the penalty imposed upon the petitioner was justifiable in law.
- Whether the Service Tribunal misread the evidence on record regarding the charges against the petitioner?
- Is the penalty of compulsory retirement imposed upon a police officer excessive and unjustifiable in the circumstances of the case?
- Whether leave to appeal should be granted to re-appraise evidence in service matters?
ORDER
MANZOOR HUSSAIN SIAL, J.---The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against order dated 31-8-1994 of the N.-W.F.P. Service Tribunal, Peshawar, whereby his Service Appeal No,367 of 1993 was dismissed.
2.The petitioner while serving as Inspector of Police (CIA) was proceeded against for making false statement before the Speedy Trial Court in a case F.I.R. No,281 dated 4/5-5-1991 registered at Police Station, University Town, Peshawar and thereby defaming a Senior Police Officer of the rank of Deputy Inspector-General of Police.
3.As a result of the inquiry he was found guilty of negligence/inefficiency and compulsorily retired from service with effect from 10-8-1993 by the Deputy Inspector-General of Police. He preferred an appeal before the Inspector-General of Police, Peshawar, but the same was dismissed on 28-11- 1993.
4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders of the Departmental Authorities he filed appeal before N.-
W.F.P. Service Tribunal, Peshawar, which was dismissed vide impugned order, referred to above.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the evidence on the record had been misread. He relied on A.U. Musarrat v. Government of West Pakistan (PLD 1977 SC 24) to contend that the penalty imposed upon the petitioner was far excessive.
6.After hearing learned counsel for petitioner leave to appeal is granted to re-appraise evidence on the record and to consider whether the penalty imposed upon the petitioner was justifiable in law.
Judges on this bench
- Manzoor Hussain Sial807 judgments
- Mir Hazar Khan Khoso453 judgments