
In the latest such incident, Section 144 was imposed to curb the smuggling of wheat to other provinces. Police officers were authorised to register complaints under Section 188 of the Pakistan Penal Code against the violators. They were, however, able to go scot-free because of the absence of the ‘real’ complainant.

Following the orders, the police and food officials had arrested several violaters and impounded their vehicles carrying wheat, as well as, registered cases against them.
When the police produced the suspects before the court to obtain their remand, the court declined the request and released the suspects under Section 63 of the CrPC as the additional chief secretary home department, who had promulgated the real order, was not the complainant in the cases.
In case of violation of an order under Section 144, the law can only be moved by filing a complaint within Section 4(h) of the CrPC by a public servant, who ordered the promulgation of Section 144 or by his superior as envisaged under section 195(1) (a) of the CrPC, otherwise no court would be in position to take cognisance, stated a judicial magistrate in district West, Ghulam Murtaza Baloch, in the order after one of the suspects was produced before the court.
“In the instant case, the complainant, within the meaning of Section 4 (h) of CrPC by the relevant public servant is missing and FIR was illegally registered by the complainant,” the court observed. The court also noted that the high court has quashed the FIRs and proceedings of such cases in several judgements.
The court ordered to release the suspects and directed the investigation officers to return the property to the real owners after proper verification.
A few days ago, the same court had ordered to discharge cases against around 100 men arrested and produced before the court in connection with pillion-riding following a ban by the provincial government.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 4th, 2014.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ