KARACHI: The inspector general of Sindh police was subjected to tough questions by the Sindh High Court on Monday during the hearing against the detention of five men acquitted in the murder case of rights activist Perween Rahman—who was shot dead in the metropolis in 2013.
“Mr IG, you are a public servant, not an employee of any government,” Justice Mohammad Karim Khan Agha said as he grilled Sindh IG Ghulam Nabi Memon. Sindh Home Secretary Saeed Ahmed, additional advocate general and others also appeared in front of the court.
The Sindh government decided on December 1 to detain the five men acquitted in the murder case of Rahman under the Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance (MPO). The decision came after the SHC ordered the release of all the accused citing a lack of evidence on November 21.
At the outset of the hearing, the additional advocate general said that the petition was not admissible. To this, Justice KK Agha said: “You people make decisions based on bad faith and come here and admit it.” He wondered the reason for detaining the acquitted men when the court has ordered to release them.
“If you object to the decision, file an appeal in the Supreme Court. Such behavior is not acceptable at all. If there is a fear of disturbance from the accused, then where is the CRO [conditional release order] of the accused?” Justice KK Agha said.
The judge expressed his displeasure and reminded the Sindh IG that he was a public servant not an “employee of any government”.
The court maintained that it released over a dozen suspects for lack of evidence. It asked the police why they did not impose the Maintenance of Public Order (MPO) against them. “The court looks at the evidence and makes a decision.”
The court further asked about the whereabouts of the released suspects. “Did the accused escape and go to Orangi Town, who informed you that there was a threat from them?”
Nabi informed the court that there were intelligence reports regarding the accused. To this, the court asked who gave such information.
“You are calling the accused criminals and could not present evidence,” the judge said. It directed the police to give a CRO. On this, the IG police sought more time from the court for presenting more details while the SSP West reiterated that they had intelligence information, on the basis of which the criminal charge was registered against the accused.
The definition of criminal was mentioned in the law, the judge said, adding: “You people have gone to the extreme of disobeying the orders of court decisions.”
The SSP further told the court that the victim’s sister had appealed that her life was in danger. To this, the SHC judge inquired if the sister had received any threatening phone calls. The SSP West replied negatively.
The court then asked who had issued the threat letter. The additional attorney general replied that it was a confidential report and it was received from the intelligence bureau.
“You guys should answer directly. Do not force us to give a strict order,” the judge remarked and warned that it would order action against the police officers.
The court reprimanded the police, saying that they were describing a phone call as an intelligence report.
The additional attorney general said that the government has the prerogative to take administrative decisions and permission for such a decision should be granted.
“If you withdraw the MPO order, the case will be over,” the court said. The home secretary said that the cabinet has empowered him and sought an opportunity for a consultation with the provincial cabinet.
Subsequently, the court adjourned the case and directed the Sindh government, IG and home secretary to consult.
