Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD YOUNAS CHISHTI VS Respondent: THE STATE and 3 others
Court Name: Lahore High Court Judge(s): Ahmad Saeed Awan Title: MUHAMMAD YOUNAS CHISHTI vs THE STATE and 3 others Case No.: Writ Petition No,5371 of 1995 Date of Judgment:1995-05-23 Reported As: 1995 P Cr. L J 1791 Result: Order accordingly
Judgment ORDER ' Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that according to section 3 of Prisons Act, 1894, the definition clause (1) obviously makes it clear that the "prison" does not include any place for the confinement of prisoners, who are exclusively in the custody of police, so the Qalandra in violation of section 42 is as consequence of misinterpretation of relevant provisions of law. Further, argued that a case F.I.R. No,146, dated 20-4-1995 was registered under section 352/506/342/379, P.P.C. Under the directions of this Court against respondent S.H.O. Which is not under proper section and appropriate section 220, P.P.C. Is attracted. 2. The Superintendent of Police present in Court states that as he has been made party to the writ petition, the case be transferred out of district. 3. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Superintendent of 'Police. Prima facie the ingredients of section 42 of Prisons Act, 1894 are not attracted and Qalandra prepared by respondent S.H.O. Is hereby quashed. The S.P. Is directed to personally look into the matter and see whether the offence under section 220, P.P.C., as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, is made out and if so, he will proceed accordingly. It has been made clear to the Superintendent of Police that fundamental rights of every citizen are guaranteed by the Constitution and no one should be allowed to play havoc with the same. With the above directions, the instant petition stands disposed of. 4. It may be observed that every citizen is equal before the law. If allegations levelled against Senior Officer are found to be incorrect, appropriate action would be taken against the petitioner.