Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 1881 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Mst. Yasmeen vs Dr

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

Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 1881 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Mst. Yasmeen VS Dr. Fahad Ahmad Ss. 9(2), 9(3) & 10---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 376(1), 384 & 341---Abduction for rape, extortion, wrongful restraint---Investigation in respect of Sched. Offences---Application for transfer of investigation to Special Sexual Offences Investigation Unit was declined---Anti-Rape (Investigation and Trial) Act, 2021 ('Act') does not define the precise composition of the Special Sexual Offences Investigation Unit but only gives broad parameters---Section 9(2) of the Act stipulates that the Special Sexual Offences Investigation Unit shall comprise Police Officers who have received training on investigation in relation to sexual offences and preferably, one member of the unit shall be a female Police Officer---Section 9(3) mandates that investigations for offences listed in Schedule-I shall be conducted exclusively by the Special Sexual Offences Investigation Unit, while those in Schedule-II are to be carried out by the Special Sexual Offences Investigation Unit under the supervision of a Police Officer not below the rank of BPS-17---Two interpretations of S.9 of the Anti-Rape Act are possible; first, that the Special Sexual Offences Investigation Unit as a unit should handle the investigation of Scheduled Offences collectively, and second, that individual Police Officers who are members of the Special Sexual Offences Investigation Unit in the relevant District may conduct the investigations independently---Anti-Rape Act encourages the involvement of lady Police Officers in handling the Scheduled Offences, though it does not impose a strict requirement---Section 9 of the Act states that the Special Sexual Offences Investigation Unit should preferably have a female Police Officer as one of its members who have received training on investigation in relation to sexual offences---Use of the word "preferably" instead of "must" indicates flexibility in unit formation, recognizing factors such as staffing constraint and resource availability---Section 10 of the Act should be interpreted to address instances where the Competent Authority establishes a Joint Investigation Team specifically---Thus, it was not correct to contend that every Scheduled Offence under the Anti-Rape Act had to be investigated by the entire Special Sexual Offences Investigation Unit---In the present case, respondent No.1 had transferred the investigation of case FIR No.1409/2022 to Lady Police Officer/SI---Advocate General had submitted documents reflecting that she was fully trained to investigate sexual offences, therefore, she was found competent to investigate the case and the petitioner's objection was overruled---Petition was accordingly dismissed.

Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 1881 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Mst. Yasmeen vs Dr — 2024 PCrLJ 1881 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PCRLJ