&, \r

d ,

LAHORE HIGH COTIRT.

Phone No. 042-99212951 Ext.274 wo. ?3c7 HC/DDr/DRIr)

D-mail: it.dtil@lhc,g-PYEk,
[email protected]
I;ax No. 042-99212279 Dated-2-/ :l* / 2O24

Offtce of the
From District & $essions Judge
$ialkot.
The Director General,
Directorate of District Jttdiciary, D ia ry N o :. -.... A3.?.?........
Lalnre High Court, Lahore. Dated:.... fl...?...J.l/.1 .. .?0?l
10
Alt the District & Sessions Judges,
In the Punjab.

Subject: - COMPLIANCE O, r THE ORDERS

,,MST.
IN CRL. MISC.NO.
27821 -H/24 BIBI YERSUS
s.H.o.. ETC.
Dear Sir.
In the light of the directions of the Hon'ble court, copy of

the ord,er daterl 13.05.2024 is hereby transmitted uith recptesl' to

circtlate the saffLe amongst atl the Judicial Officers of District

Juc)iciary, h.tnjab uorking in gour respectiue districts, including the

Jucticial Offtcers utorking on Ex-Cadre/ Special Courts, fo,

compliartce in letter and spirit.

Yours ll!),

GUL KHAN
Director General
Directorate of District Judiciary
5r..- ,"PY b"- &j k /r"?-
/n /rrr+"f 7
4/,1 J."
,F +r".t'A ,,,/ 7r,*"--

0istrh,t iu .ludgo
v)
t3
lrl"*'
 ['ornr NulllCJD/C'l2l
ORDER SHEET
IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE
(JUD TCI,A.L DEPARTMENT)

Casc No. Crl.Misc.No.2782l -lll24

lvlst. lVajuru l)ibi Vcrsus S.H.O., crc

Sr.No nutul'cs of .Itrtlgc, :lntl llt:tt of 1l:trtics tll' cottllscl,

Pr<lc rvhcrc ncccss:tr]'.

13.05.2024 M/S Israr Flussain and Muhamrnad Ashttrq Cu.ijar,

Advocates with the petitioner.
Rana Umair Abrar Khan, A.A.G. with lklarrr Shehbaz.
SHO, Najam ul Hassan, S.I. and Warris Virk, S.l.

Through this petition under Section 191

Cr.P.C. the petitioner Mst. Najma Ribi. seol<s

recovery of Mst. Nagina, her daughter in larv, fiom

the illegal and unlawftrl confinernent of
respondents, inter-alia, on the grounds that on
04.05.2024 around 2/3.00 A.M. (night)
respondents alongwith other police officials raided
at the house of the petitioncr and tool< arvay the

alleged detenue without her involvement in any

crirninal case; that when the petitioner contacted
tlte respondents for releasc o1'the allcge-cl dctcnue-,
they dernanded illegal gratification o1-

Rs.10,00,000/-, otherwise, threatened to involve

her in multiple criminal cases.

2. This Court vitlc orc'lcr clatccl 06.05 102-+

directed respondent No.l/SIJO, P.S. Daska (SI-IO)

to produce the alleged detenue in the Court.
3. SI{O instead of producing the deteuue,
subrnitted a repo( that the alleged detenue was
reqtrired in I?lR No.754/24 datcd 29.03.2024, in
respect of an offence UIS 392 PPC, r'egistered at

P.S. City Daska and l-ras bceu sct'tt to judicial locli

up on 08.05.2024. \
TR
kt

f,remhtcr I lfll
lrol . .,,1 iI rt' +,l. _.t
 C rl. Mis c. N o.27 82L -Ll -2 4 )

J 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner sublnils

that the SHO has created false evidence against the

detenue in order to cover his illegal act; that earlier

the petitioner filed Writ Petition No.16520/24

before this Courl cornplaining the highhandedness/

harassment of the police authorities to thc-
petitioner and her family tnetnbers, in rvhich viclc
order dated 03.04.2024, SI-IO submittecl an

undertaking that he will not harass the pctitiotrcr itr

any nranncr in tuture, upoll which said rvrit

pctition was disposcd of; that SI{O nttrttrrccl

grudge of filing of said writ petition against tl're

petitioner and in order to teach her lesson illegally
and unlarvlully confined her dar.rghter in law; that
the petitioner has also filed contempt petition
against the SFIO in this regard.

5. SHO, in attendance, was inquired how the

alleged detenue was involved in the aforesaid
criminal cASe, upon which he stated that vide case
diary No.2 dated 09.04.2024, accused persons
namely Attique Butt, Bilal and Awais duting
investigation disclosed that earlier they coururitted
the offence of robbery with the help of Khalid.
husband of the alleged detenue but after the anest

of said Khalid, they committed the robbery at the

pointation of the alleged detenue; that thereafter
the complainant in his supplernentary statenrent

recorded on i6.04.2024 involved the alleged

detenue in the occunence, as such she was amestecl

and sent to juclicial locl< upr. This stancc of thc

SHO is self contradictory, if the co-accused ruade
disclosure qua involvement of the deterrue in the
occurrence then there should not be any need tbr
the supplementary statement of the cornplainant
and the Investigating Offrcer was required to
PY
t\

.,1 I ,ilCr llt

"1
'. )tr .i :lhort
t Ilj,,,
/ Crl.Misc.N o.27 821 -Il-2 I 3

proceed further therc and then in thc light o[

alleged disclosure but he remained dortnant atrd
then after almost seven days of alleged disclosuLe
recorded the supplernentary statemeut of the

complainant which sans source of information.

6. On Court's quety, he has failed to prodtrce
the police record, which contained case diaries but
on the contrary produced the incornplete reporl
U/S 173 Cr.P.C. wliich prirna facie leads to tllc
conclusion that sornethir-rg is rvrong irr the [rottottt.
7. I have also gone through the FIR No.754124
dated 29.03.2024, in t'cspcct ol'an ol-l-erlcc Ll/S 392
PPC, registered at P.S. City Daska, which rvas gol

lodged by the complainant against three unknown

persons. The alleged occurrence has taken place in
Canal View Town, Daska, District Sialkot,

whereas, the alleged detenue is resident of Tehsil

Kamonke, District Gujranwala. Interestingly, the

rest of three accused are also residents of Tehsil
Daska and it seems very ludicrous, horv the alleged
detenue could point out a house for comtnission of
an offence that was situated in some other district,
in particular, when the cornplainant ,uas previously
stranger to her. Similar is the situation with the
supplementary staterlent of the complainaut rvhich
was recorded after twenty days of the alleged
occurence, wherein he did not disclose his source
of inforrnation qua the involvement of the alleged
detenue in tlie occurrerrce. The petitioner has

knocked the door of this Court complaining illegal

and unlawful confinement of the alleged cletenue

on 06.05.2024 and this Court requirecl irer

prodtrction in tlre Court on 10.05.2021 and
apparently on receipt of said notice, the SHO in
connivance with the Investigating Officer of said
\
ruiir'.:l Brr
r{i 'll

1
1
 .l
C rl. Mis c. N o.27 EZ I -lI-2 4

case namely Najam ul Hassan, S'I' , in order to

bypass the direction of this Court, produced the
alleged detenue before tlre Magistrate Sectiori-30,
judicial
Daska on 08.05.2025 for sending her on
that it
rernand. Perusal of the remand paper shows
was not forwarded by the concerned' Prosecutor
but arnazingly the learr-red Magistrate not only

entettaiued the request of the lnvestigating Otlicer'

without the salne being fbrwarded by the
to the
Prosecutor but also send the alleged detenue
judicial lock up in a mechanical rlanner without
applying its judicial rnind as to whether suftlcient
ruaterial was available against the allcgccl detcnrtc

to curtail lier liberlY or not.

8. The liberty and dignity of a person have
always remained sacrosanct and have been placed
atop the fundamental/ human rights pedestal'
Islarl

has conferred Llpon human being the liighest level

of dignity amongst all of Allah's creatiori and

secured and protected for thern comlllete liberty

rvithin the prescribed limits. ' Everyone has the

right to liberly and security of person' No one shall

be subjected to arbitrary anest or detention' No
one shall be deprived of his liberty except on sttch
grounds and in accordance with such procedure as

are established by law.z Life bereft of liberty

woulcl be rvithout honour and dignity and it would

lose all significance and meaning and the life itself
would not be worth living. This is why "libefty" is
called the very quintessence of a civilized
existence...3 Even Article 9 of the Constitution of
Islanric Republic of Pakistan, 1973 guarantees that
I1o person shall be deprived of life and liberty save

I Kh. Salman Rafiq Case (PLD 2020 SC 456)

See
\
, a.tl.L Civil and Political rigltts.
tSXf ) of the International Convenatrt on
'ern 20n sc 312 to

Eramintr

'7 ")r
e_
 -'t
.1
Crl.l\'Iis c. N o.27 82 l-11-2 4
I

rit.i
in accordallce with larv' Pt'otectiotl aBalllst
v the right to
arbitrary arl'est and detention is part of
it is
liberty and fair trial.a Here in the instant case'
not
an adrrittecl fact that the alleged detenue was
named in the crime report of the aforementioned
criminal case. She was involved in the case
the co-
subsequently on the so-called disclosure of
accused before the police. According to Article
38

of the Qanun-e-shahadat Order, 1984, adrnission

of an accused before police cannot be used as
evidence against the co-accused'5 Even otherwise'

it is well settled by now that confession of an

accused before is inadrnissible in
the police
evidence as far as adrnission of his.own
involvernent in the alleged offence concerned, thus
his statement vis-ir-vis involvemerrt of the co-
accused is ordinarily twice removed from
admissibility or reliability.6 I am of the
considered view that the so-called disclosure of the

co-accused, which even not produced before the

Court, was insufficient to curtail the liberty of the

alleged detenue, which is her inalienable rigl-rt

enshrined in the Constitution.

Second piece of evidence created by the

SHO & Investigating Officer, in order to justily
the amest/detention of the alleged detenue is
supplernentary statement got recorded by hirn
almost twenty days of the alleged occurrence but
he did not disclose his source qua involvement of
the alleged detenue in the alleged occunence.

Moreso, as has been discussed supra, the alleged

detenue is resident of Tehsil Katnonlic, District

{ for
See Wlrat Is A Fair Trial: A Basic Guide to Legal Standards and Practice, published by Lawyers Comrniftee
Human Rights, IJSA (2000)
5
Raja N,luhanrnrad Younis .vs. The State (2013 SCMR 669).
COPY
" Alan, Zcb .V. The State and others (PLD 2014 SC /60)

stl
r rl'Jl-t
,, 'l
 C rl.Mis c.N o,27 821-tl'2 I 6

1 Gtr.it'itttrvitllt, rvltct'clls. thc allcgctl

()cctll'l'cllcc It:t:l

taken place in Tehsil Daska, District Sialkot

and

there is a complete silence in the staternent of

thc

complainant, how she could lloint out her holtse

for the purpose of robbery, in particular, rvhen she
was earlier stranger to her. It is well scttlcd by ttolv

that any statement or further stater-nettt of tfuc f rrst

infortnant recorded during the investigation by
police would neither be equated with First
Inforrnation Report nor read as part of it'7 Thc
Apex Court in a plethora of judgrnerrts obserrrecl
that supplementary statenient rccorded
subsequently to the FIR can be vierved as
improvement.s Although in order to strengthen the
case against the alleged detenue recovely oi oue

pair of gold earrings was shorvn against her but

neither the weight of alleged recovered gold
ornaments was mentioned nor its cornptete

description was disclosed to connect her with the

alleged crime. Moreso, occurrence has taken place
on29.03.2024 and the alleged recovery wassltorvn
to be elfected from the handbag of the alleged
I t/zuronths
detenue on 08.05.2 024 i.e.after ahno st

and it is beyond contprehension tltat an accttscd of

robbery kept the case properly in her hand bag for

such a long period. Apparently, the SHO in active

connivance with the Investigating Ottlcer
manipulated forged and fabricated evidence in
order to
avoid the consequences of illegal

detention. Unfortunately, learned Magistrate

TlttiE Section-30, Daska has also not applied its judicial

h mind and acceded the request ofjudicial rernand of
i rtn iurl B
0
the alleged detenue, which was even ttot forwarded

' Falak Sher .vs. The State ( 1995 SCMR 1350)

' tg93 SCtvtR550,l996 SCMR685,20ll SCMR 379,2011 SCMR l6l & 2003 SCMR426
A
 7
C rl. NIisc. N o.27 821 -Il-2 I

by the concerned Prosectttor, l'esulting into

I
gral/e
I
miscarriage of jrrstice.
9- Iror thc rcflsot'ls crtuttrct'atccl itbovt" thc

deter:tion of the alleged detenue narlely Mst'

result
Nagina Ashraf is hereby declared illegal and
of mis-use of authoritYbY the SHO &
Investigating Officer. The evidence so far
collected against her is insufficient to curtail her
liberty even tbr a t-trinute, therefbre, irrstcad ol'
ntirltirtg hcr ball of ping pollg lbr uplrroaching thc
Court of first instance for her release on lrail' this
Court while exercising its jurisdictiorr under

Section 561-A Cr.P.C. , granted her post arrest bail

subject to furnishing of bail bonds in the sum of
Rs.10,000/- withone surety in the like amoutrt to
' the satisfaction of the Trial court. she shall be
released frorn the jail forthwith, if not required irl
any other case.

10. Having said so, the way and the tnanner the
police officials abducted the alleged detenue b1'
trespassing into her house at rnid-night without any

search warrants, confined her for a nutlber of days

and then created false and frivolous evidence

against her in order to justify their act requires
serious attentiou. Apparently, thc s[-lo uutlurccl
grudge against the petitioner for filing of
harassment petition against hirr and in order to
teach her lesson and made her example for the rest

of aggrievecl persons, he took the law into hands

and abducted the alleged detenue, in the rnid-nigirt

and confined her in unlawful custody' When tire
petitioner again approached to the Court seeking
recovery of alleged detenue, then in order to cover
his illegal act, he in active connivance with the

Ilvestigating Officer, involved her in the afolesaid

TRTIE COPY \
).r-....+

inrl li
I rll i , :.t drr
 i
i
871-H'24
I
f Crl.Misc.N o.27
I
f directeci to
t
t( crirninal case. District Police Otficer' is
t suspend the SHO, P.S' City Daska
natlely Ikraur
ul SI'
l

Hassan' for
I
Shehbaz and Syed Najam
j
I
I rlisusing their authority forthivitli' initiate
f
departntental proceedings against then'r
and

concluclc thc samc within thrcc urotlths li'onr

tlrc

date hereof under intimation to the Deputl'

that
Registrar (J) of this Courl' F{e shall also ens"tre
no posting will be given to both the officials till the

conclusion of the clepartnrentaI proceedings'

Bcsidcs abovc, SIIO ittrcl Irlvcstigutirlg Ofllccr

arc

also liable to face criminal case, therefore'

petitioner is directed to move written application
for abduction/ illegal confinetnent of the alleged
detenue to the DPO, Sialkot, who shall ensrlre
registration of case against thern under the reievant
provisionsoflawforthwith.Toeiirr.rinatetlre
excuse for non-registration of FIR on the grorrnd
that the petitioner has not appeared before the
police for getting registration of case, in case of his
failure, the DPO is directed to get FIR registered
against the above-mentioned delinquent police
officials through any of his subordinates not-below
than the rank of DSP.

i l. Before parling with this order, follorving

directions are issued to all the concemed tbr strict
cornpliance in the futnre:-
(i) Liberty of a person is a fundamental
right enshrined in the Constitution and tto
one can be allowed to curtail the same on
the basis of rnalafide and colourful exercise
of authoritY.
(ii) Supplementary statement lecorded by

the complainant for involving a particular

PY accused in an incident, without disclosing

li1l,r ( tr urL l',ahore'

I
i\ l.-\ .''
 Crl.Misc.N o.27821'H'21 9

J
the soufce of infonlation, is not per se
adrnissible piece of evidence, as such while
recording such statement, the Investigation
Officer should irrsist upon the cornplainant
to disclose his source of iufomration.
(iii) Investigating Officer should not cause
arrest of the accused straightaway upon thc
supplernentary statement of the cotnplainant,
rather he is duty bound to first collect
incrirninating piece of evidence irr supporl of
such statement and then proceed in

accordance with Iaw.

(iv) Tlrr: r'cclucst ol'tho Irlvcstiguting Olllcor'
for physical/judicial retnand of strch accttsed,
tttust have been accompanied with the opinion
of the concerned Prosecutor qua suft'iciency
of the rnaterial against hirn.
(v) Any request sans of the opinion of the
concemed Prosecutor shall not be entertained
by the Area Magistrate or the Court as the
case may be.

(ri) The Area Magistrate or the Court, as

the case may be, shall not- grant
ph)'sical/judicial remand in a rnechanical
manner, rather record its reasons for
according such request.
(vii) If the supplementary statement of the
cornplainant is bereft of source of inforrnation
for involvement of an accused, the Area
Magistrate or the Court as the case utay be,
may require the presence of the cotnplainant
before dealing with such request.

\ x^ II
[o 1

(Cr.irrrin.:l
l{ig!; t-'ourU
,.tr
j' 1
 l0
C rl.M is c.N o.21 821-ll-21
amongst
13. Copy of this order shall be circulated
Registfar
all the concerned for cornpliance through
of this Court.
Dis ed of.
-;el'-
(Asjact Javaid Ghtrral)
Judgc

Approved for RePorting

.Itrtlgc COPY
;'t rlr r
I .'rl ru.
/', ^ ()
/,'-)u '+vl,\ v) (Criurin:J

,l
./.
qfi tl Iligh Court"
)A
I
(1il
V" rl
!,1) t .4