Mst. Najma Bibi vs Station House Officer S — 2024 MLD 1693 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Mst. Najma Bibi VS Station House Officer S. 161---Supplementary statement---Scope---Any statement or further statement of the first informant recorded during the investigation by police would neither be equated with FIR nor read as part of it. Citation Name: 2024 MLD 1693 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Mst. Najma Bibi VS Station House Officer Ss. 491 & 561-a---Constitution of Pakistan, art. 199---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), art. 38---Constitutional petition---Habeas corpus petition---Petitioner through constitutional petition sought custody of her daughter-in-law from the illegal and unlawful confinement of police---Station House Officer instead of producing the detenue submitted a report that the alleged detenue was required in FIR No. 754/24 in respect of an offence under S.392, P.P.C and had been sent to judicial lock up---First Information Report No. 754/24, in respect of an offence under S.392, P.P.C, was lodged by the complainant against three unknown persons---alleged occurrence had taken place in place"D" whereas, the alleged detenue was resident of place "K" of another District---Interestingly, the rest of three accused were also residents of place "D" and it seemed very ludicrous, how the alleged detenue could point out a house for commission of an offence that was situated in some other district,in particular, when the complainant was previously stranger to her---Similar was the situation with the supplementary statement of the complainant which was recorded after twenty days of the alleged occurrence, wherein he did not disclose his source of information qua the involvement of the alleged detenue in the occurrence---Detenue was involved in the case subsequently on the so-called disclosure of the co-accused before the police---according to art. 38 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, admission of an accused before police could not be used as evidence against the co-accused---Even otherwise, confession of an accused before the police is inadmissible in evidence as far as admission of his own involvement in the alleged offence is concerned---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 was her inalienable right enshrined in the Constitution---apparently, the SHO in active connivance with the Investigating Officer manipulated forged and fabricated evidence in order to avoid the consequences of illegal detention---In such circumstances, the detention of the alleged detenue was declared illegal and result of mis-use of authority by the SHO and Investigating Officer---Evidence so far collected against detenue was insufficient to curtail her liberty even for a minute, therefore, instead of making her a ball of ping pong for approaching the Court of first instance for her release on bail, the Court while exercising its jurisdiction under S.561-a Cr.P.C., granted her post arrest bail and directed that, detenue shall be released from the jail forthwith, if not required in any other case---District Police Officer, was directed to suspend the SHO and Investigating Officer for misusing their authority forthwith, initiate departmental proceedings against them and conclude the same within three months---Petition was disposed of accordingly.

Mst. Najma Bibi vs Station House Officer S — 2024 MLD 1693 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 MLD