Suo motto case regarding police brutalities against lawyers /journalists adjourned ISLAMABAD, Oct 31 (Online): The three-member bench formed to review the Suo motto case against police for brutalizing lawyers and journalists, besides firing teargas shells over the building of Supreme Court, has been adjourned till 12th Nov. The Bench comprising of Justice Mian Shakir Ullah Jan and Nasir-ul-Mulk, and led by CJ, opened the proceedings of the Suo motto case, with the SC expressing it deep regrets and sorrow over the deliberate delay and dodging attitude of officials, terming it as an affront to the right and dignity of lawyers, journalists and civil society. Advocate general Aftab Ahmad Chaudhry informed the Apex Court that the tear gas shells were not intended for the Supreme Court building, upon which CJ reprimanded his lame excuse by informing the attorney general that a damage was not necessarily judged by intentions, but whenever and however caused. The CJ also demanded to know as to who had ordered, (and not those who had fired) those shells, upon which the suspended magistrate Arif Rahim denied giving such orders (of firing gas shells), since his duty was not outside, but within the building of Supreme Court, to report on specific events and issues. The CJ reminded the magistrate that he was no good for his duties, since he was sitting in the canteen instead of performing his official duty, and rather lauded Qayyum Siddiqui, who at least bothered to pick up a teargas shell to show it to the registrar. The Court declared Mr. Arif Rahim as incompetent, since a written a report is sent under these circumstances. The CJ also enquired about the tear gas shells from suspended DC, Chaudhry Muhammad Ali, who replied that the tear gas shells were fired by the driver of the APC (armored personal carrier) . The CJ also questioned the suspended SSP Naeem Khan about the deployment of under-training plainclothesmen at Constitution Avenue on the evening of 29th September, upon which the SSP informed him that it was a joint decision, and 80 uniformed policemen, 120 plainclothesmen, were deployed on Constitution Avenue, while 120 police personnel and 320 plainclothesmen were deployed in Election commission. The CJ and Justice Nasir-ul-Mulk were chagrined that the plainclothesmen deployed were carrying stones, pelting lawyers and journalists, who are cream and intelligentsia of the society, and have never even plucked a flower as such, like soldiers are killed in battleground. Naeem Khan said that he had no verbal or written orders to assault or brutalize anybody while the MS of Polyclinic informed the SC that a total of 70 persons had been brought to the hospital for treatment on 29th September, which included 26 advocates, 19 journalists, 17 policemen and one civil citizen . A journalist Farrukh Nawaz, who appeared as a witness, informed the Court that a policeman pulled his gun over him, a picture of which has also appeared in press, while a FIR lodged in Thana secretariat had not yet been materialized. The CJ inquired as to whom he had nominated as defendants, upon which the journalist named DC, Interior minister, and the PM. The CJ reprimanded the journalist for his political statement, and cautioned him that ministers and PM are not responsible for every act, upon which the journalists limited his nomination to the IG. SHO, Thana secretariat was intimated who assured that he had marked the FIR to investigative officer. SSP Taimur Ali Khan was also reprimanded by CJ for policemen just showing of their police uniform (authority), and not heeding to their duty.
Posted on: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 11:11:57 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015