| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2006 SLG 2548 2006 SLD 2548 2006 SCMR 827 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No.3071 of 2003, decision dated: 14-11-2005 (On appeal from the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Rawalpindi, dated 27-9-2003 passed in Appeal No.1081 of 2003)
MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI AND NASIR-UL-MULK, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Petition No.3071 of 2003, decision dated: 14-11-2005 (On appeal from the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Rawalpindi, dated 27-9-2003 passed in Appeal No.1081 of 2003)
MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI AND NASIR-UL-MULK, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
RIAZ HUSSAIN
VS
INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE, PUNJAB and 2 others
Law:
Section:
(a) Criminal trial-------Investigation, defect in---Effect---Such defect might not be a valid ground for discharge of an accused, but insufficiency in evidence would definitely be a strong ground to discharge him. (b) Punjab Police (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975--- ----Rr. 3 & 4(1)(b)(v)---Dismissal from service---Misconduct, charge of---Omission of civil servant as Investigating Officer of a criminal case to obtain signatures of witnesses on recovery memo. of stolen vehicle---Magistrate discharge accused for want of incriminating evidence on record to connect him with commission of offence of theft---Initiation of disciplinary proceedings against civil servant (1.0.) on charge of negligence for such omission---Penalty of dismissal imposed by departmental authority was upheld by Service Tribunal---Validity---Magistrate had discharged accused for want of evidence and not only for defect in recovery memo. or in investigation---Such omission might or might not be a factor to damage prosecution case, but in absence of any evidence that such omission was intentional, same would be treated as bona fide mistake, which might not constitute an act of misconduct---Supreme Court accepted appeal, set aside impugned and reinstated civil servant in service without back benefits treating the intervening period as leave without pay. Roy Muhammad Nawaz Khan Kharal, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Syed Sajjad Hussain Shah, A.A.-G. for Respondents. Date of hearing: 14th November, 2005. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, J.--- This petition has been directed against the judgment, dated 27-9-2003 passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal, whereby appeal of the petitioner against the penalty of dismissal from service imposed upon him by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Rawalpindi, was dismissed and order of the Departmental Authority was upheld. 2. The petitioner was proceeded against for the charge as under: "S.P./City has reported that you remained in touch with the inquiry of case F.I.R. No.103, dated 4-4-2001 under section 381-A, P.P.C. Police Station New Town for long time. You are also sent to Gilgit from where the stolen car in question was recovered andβ¦
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492