PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court has ordered the quashing of an FIR against several lawyers for ‘attacking’ the offices of Peshawar’s deputy commissioner during a demonstration against a police case against one of their colleagues.

A bench consisting of Justice Musarrat Hilali and Justice Abdul Shakoor accepted two almost identical petitions of the Peshawar High Court Bar Association (PHCBA) and Peshawar District Bar Association (PDBA) seeking quashing of the June 4 FIR registered at the East Cantonment police station on the complaint of the deputy commissioner.

The case was registered amid a controversy between lawyers and government employees that led to the arrest and booking of senior legal practitioner Syed Ghufranullah Shah at the Chamkani police station on the complaint of an additional assistant commissioner (AAC) on June 2.

Barrister Amir Khan Chamkani appeared for the petitioners and contended that the police had overstepped their powers under the Code of Criminal Procedure while registering a fabricated case against the lawyers, who staged a peaceful protest.

Accepts petitions of PHCBA, PDBA for FIR cancellation

The bench observed that as per the FIR, the mob was neither armed with deadly weapons nor did it injure or threaten anyone, so the allegations made in the FIR, on the face of it, did not constitute a cognisable offence.

“Lodging of the FIR in non-cognisable offences is in utter violation of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, and now, it has been established that FIR can be quashed if, from the bare reading of its contents, a cognisable offence is not made out,” it observed.

The bench observed that under the CrPC, there were two types of offences i.e. cognisable and non-cognisable.

It added that the cognisable offence meant a case in which a police officer, in accordance with the second schedule to the code or under any other law, might arrest without warrants.

The bench observed that a non-cognisable offence was one in which the police officer might not arrest without warrants.

“In case of a cognisable offence, under Section 154 of the CrPC every information, if given oral to an officer in charge of a police station, shall be reduced into writing by him or under his direction, and the substance thereof shall be entered in a book kept by such officer in such form as the provincial government may prescribed in this behalf, which was called as the FIR. If the information is related to a non-cognisable offence, then under Section 155(1) of the CrPC, such information shall be entered in a book known as Daily Diary ‘roznamcha’ and shall be referred to a magistrate,” it observed.

The court observed that there was a key difference between the two terms as in a cognisable offence police had powers to investigate the case without formal permission of the magistrate and can arrest an accused without warrants, while in the other case, such authority was not vested with the police officer.

It added that if a police officer, in a non-cognisable offence, arrested any person or investigated the case without permission of the court, such course would not only be a violation of the mandatory provisions of CrPC’s Section 155(2) but also he would expose himself for penal consequences or prosecution under Section 220 of the PPC.

In the FIR, the district administration had alleged that members of the legal fraternity forcefully entered the premises of the DC Complex and manhandled security staff deputed at the DC’s offices, shouted slogans and used abusive language.

It further alleged that the mob had pelted stones and vandalised government property, especially the smashing of the main entrance door.

The administration had claimed that the protest was led by PDFBA president Ali Zaman and general secretary Akbar Riaz Khalil and the protesters were instigated by advocate Ghufranullah.

In the FIR against Ghufranullah, the AAC insisted that he went to a filling station on the GT Road to look into the complaints about ‘hindrance to fuel supply to motorists’ and as he was busy with his official duty, Ghufranullah, began hurling threats at him and his police guards before attacking them and trying to snatch their weapons.

Similarly, another FIR was registered against the AAC at Chamkani police station on June 4 on the order of the additional sessions judge, who had accepted a petition of Ghufranullah Shah under Section 22-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The lawyer had charged the AAC and two policemen of torturing and intimidating him.

Published in Dawn, October 2nd, 2022