Pakistan Case Law
1977 P Cr. L J 2

Ch. SHAH MUHAMMAD vs S. H. O., RAHIMYER KHAN AND 2 OTHERS

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1977 P Cr. L J 2
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Writ Petition No, 821 of 1976
Date1976-03-30
Judge(s)Karam Elahi Chauhan
ResultPetition dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter arises from a petition filed by Ch. Shah Muhammad against the Station House Officer of Rahimyer Khan and others, challenging the police's refusal to register a First Information Report or conduct an investigation into an alleged incident, having instead recorded the information in the daily diary. The core legal question concerns the legality of a police officer's refusal to register a cognizable offence under the relevant legal provisions and police rules. The Lahore High Court held that under Rule 24.4 of the Punjab Police Rules and sections 154 and 157 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, if an officer-in-charge suspects that an alleged cognizable offence has not been committed, recording the substance in the station diary with reasons and refusing investigation is not without lawful authority. Furthermore, the petitioner has an alternate remedy of filing a private complaint before a court of competent jurisdiction. The petition was accordingly dismissed in limine.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether the police can refuse to register a First Information Report upon receiving information of a cognizable offence?
  • Does an officer-in-charge of a police station have the authority to record reasons in the station diary for suspecting an alleged offence has not been committed?
  • Is a writ petition maintainable against the refusal of police to investigate when an alternate remedy of filing a private complaint is available?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Rule 24.4, Punjab Police Rules
  • Rule 24.1, Punjab Police Rules
  • Section 157, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
  • Section 154, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
registration of FIRcognizable offencepolice daily diaryPunjab Police Ruleswrit petitionalternate remedy

ORDER

1. ' From the averments in the petition, it appears that the petitioner made a report of the alleged incident to the Police, but they refused to register the case or make any investigation in that respect and simply made an entry in the daily diary of the police station. According to rule 24.4 of the Punjab Police Rules "if the information or other intelligence relating to the alleged commission of a cognizable offence, is such that an officer-in-charge of a police station has reason to suspect that the alleged offence has not been committed, he shall enter the substance of the information or intelligence in the station diary and shall record his reasons for suspecting that the alleged offence has not been committed and shall also notify to the informant, if any, the fact that he will not investigate the case or cause it to be investigated", In sub-rule (3) of Rule 24.4, it is further written that "when reasonable suspicion of such commission arises a First Information Report shall be recorded in the police station concerned and investigation under section 157, Criminal Procedure Code, shall be made". To the same strain is Rule 24.1 of the Punjab Police Rules. These Rules are in line with the proviso to section 157 and section 154 of the Cr. P. C. In that view of the matter, if the Police, suspecting that there was no reasonable ground for recording the F. I. R. Or making the investigation, has refused to proceed in the matter, the action of the police cannot be said to be without lawful authority. Moreover the petitioner, in my opinion, has also a remedy, if he is so advised, to file a complaint before a Court of competent jurisdiction. For both these reasons I do not entertain the present petition and dismiss the same in limine.

Cited by 8 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.