Lahore:
Lahore High Court (LHC) has outlined the circumstances, during which further investigation, re -examination or transfer of a continuous investigation of a case can be imposed. It noted that such orders cannot be transferred just because one of the parties in a case is dissatisfied with the investigation or to favor any page.
In his written order, LHC’s Justice Tanveer Ahmad Sheikh rejected the attitude of the Punjab police that re-examination can be ordered, even after submitting the final report under section 173 of the Code of Criminal Case (CRPC) and that a study can continue until the conclusion of a trial, ” the performance of justice ”.
Justice Sheikh observed that “no harsh and rapid rules can be established with regard to the criterion that justifies the adoption of such orders because there is no yardstick as there must be in all cases in the light of its own distinctive circumstances”.
Justice Sheikh also observed that the orders for examination, re -examination and transfer of an ongoing study rarely and in extraordinary circumstances.
By listing the nine different circumstances when re -examination or transfer can take place, he said such an order can be adopted when certain aspects of fundamental elements of an offense, or version of the defendant could not be investigated or new facts, better proof or additional information has become available that have direct significant and vital nexus with the raised crime.
“[Reinvestigation can be allowed when] Some proclaimed offenders in the case have been arrested, and important evidence such as the restoration of weapons for offense must be collected and other allied issues must be investigated.
“[It can also be warranted when] Defects of vital nature in an already completed study has been marked/ discovered/ pointed out [or when] An already completed study [has] remained unsatisfactory because of no availability of required evidence. “
He said such an order can be transferred when the Investigation Officer (IO) has expanded unnecessary advantage to a party by the induction of false evidence or caused some material evidence disappearing or otherwise happening to be partical or partial.
“It is justified when]IO is happening to be negligent, incompetent or have failed to perform his duty properly; and [when the] Examination must be transferred to another forum or team due to some technical/sensitive problems [or when] There is any other compelling circumstance, which makes it necessary for investigation to be transferred to another officer. “
Discussed another inquiry about the adoption of an order for further investigation/reinvestment after framing the formal tax, Justice Sheikh observed that the extent of the same mucus down and is limited to limited circumstances.
“When an investigation of an accused person and report under section 173 of the CRPC has been submitted about him, it indicates that every aspect of the case of the said accused has already been investigated, and material produced by both sides has already been collected and brought into the file, and IO has also made sense.”
The verdict said that such orders can be transferred under very extraordinary circumstances and in rare cases of rare cases where some new information occurs, which requires additional probe/clarification that requires the supplementary study to collect more proof.
The case
Senter Maryam Bibi got a four registered against her relatives – Mukhtar Ahmad, Rukhsana Bibi, Tanveer Ahmad and Naveed Ahmad under the CRPC’s section 173.
The file revealed that accused Naveed Ahmad moved an application to the district’s standing board and claimed the case was absolutely false and junk. The Board of Directors adopted an order on July 23, 2025 to transfer the case of the first IO to organized crime Sahiwal DSP Iftikhar Ahmad.
Senter Maryam Bibi then challenged the order in LHC. Her lawyer argued that the transfer of the investigation at a delayed stage after the framing of the formal tax was discharged by the country’s supreme court.
The lawyer’s lawyer claimed in her written submission that there is no explicit legal ban on the further investigation, re -examination or transfer of a continuous investigation, and a police officer may submit a subsequent report in accordance with section 173 of the CRPC to replace an earlier either on his own or towards overall officers.
She further claimed that the purpose of the further investigation or re -examination is to gather all the evidence to help the right reach a fair conclusion. However, Justice Sheikh Maryam Binis allowed the petition by placing the order adopted by DPO Sahiwal.
