LAHORE:
The Superior Court of Lahore (LHC) ruled that an investigative agency will not carry out more investigations after the cancellation report prepared by an IO is approved by a magistrate, until, unless the master order is reserved by another court of justice.
In a verdict, written by Judge Ali Zia Bajwa, of the Bank LHC Finen, he observed that the illegalities committed by an investigative agency not only undermine the holiness of due process, but also lead to a complete judicial error, culminating in the illegal detention of a citizen.
Established five guidelines to decide if any additional investigation can be carried out legally after the approval of a magistrate of a cancellation report presented by an IO.
He pointed out that as soon as the cancellation report prepared by a investigation agency agrees by the worried magistrate, this fact must quickly enter the relevant police registry. The IO must also register this development in the case file, which properly indicates it in the police diary.
Before ordering the transfer of an investigation, the corresponding Board, as provided for in article 18-A of the Police Order, 2002, must meticulously examine the entire registration to determine if the criminal case continues to exist legally and has not been canceled or canceled.
When the investigation of a criminal case is transferred, the confident officer will do it exclusively and will not return to the previous IO under any circumstance. The magistrates who handle pressed or prior issues must exercise strict surveillance and closely examine registration, so that their orders do not unadverted an illegality.
The case
The Muhammad Sarfraz petition had sought a bond prior to the arrest in a signed registered against him under section 392 of the Pakistan Criminal Code at the Basti Malook Police Station in Finen.
The petitioner’s lawyer argued that although the criminal case had been canceled by the order of the magistrate in question in the light of the cancellation report prepared by the IO, the police are still resolved in their attempt to stop the petitioner.
Police, instead of challenging the master order, submitted an application before the Permanent Board of the District under article 18-A of the Police Order, 2002, seeking the first change of investigation.
The Board rejected the application, considering inappropriate to transfer the investigation. Subsequently, an application was submitted to the Permanent Regional Board in search of a research transfer.
As a result, on March 6, 2024, the case was delivered to the regional investigation branch for greater investigation, without taking into account the fact that the cancellation report had already been supported by the magistrate and that no criminal case was legally in the field at that time.
The registration also reveals that after the Permanent Regional Board transferred the investigation to the regional investigation branch, it subsequently turned to the Local Police Station.
