Bureaucratic procedures: Justice delayed is justice denied
The city police’s efforts to ensure justice are being retarded by bureaucratic procedures in district courts.
ISLAMABAD:
The city police’s efforts to ensure justice are being retarded by bureaucratic procedures in district courts, The Express Tribune has learnt. The police recently became victim of red-tapism while trying to obtain CCTV footage from a bank in order to identify suspects in a theft case.
After the bank refused to provide the CCTV footage to the police on legal grounds, the police was told to seek permission from the sessions court to retrieve the video. The sessions court said the matter was not under its jurisdiction and advised the police to seek permission from the high court to obtain the footage .
When the investigation officer in the case, Muneer Khan, approached the high court, it referred the matter back to the sessions court.
The high court was informed that the matter had already been taken to the sessions court which had advised the police to seek help from the high court, but the investigation officer was told to file an appeal against the sessions court’s refusal order. However, the issue compounded when the police realised there was no written order by the session court that it could appeal against.
The ultimate sufferer was the victim in the robbery case, Naseera Fatima, whose car, ATM card and other important documents were stolen from her house early this month. The burglars broke into her house and made away with the items. Before Fatima could block her ATM card, the robbers had used it to withdraw Rs25,000 from her account.
Since there were no written orders by the sessions court, the police were denied key evidence against the suspects. The police were left on their own to figure out a solution to the problem.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 20th, 2011.
The city police’s efforts to ensure justice are being retarded by bureaucratic procedures in district courts, The Express Tribune has learnt. The police recently became victim of red-tapism while trying to obtain CCTV footage from a bank in order to identify suspects in a theft case.
After the bank refused to provide the CCTV footage to the police on legal grounds, the police was told to seek permission from the sessions court to retrieve the video. The sessions court said the matter was not under its jurisdiction and advised the police to seek permission from the high court to obtain the footage .
When the investigation officer in the case, Muneer Khan, approached the high court, it referred the matter back to the sessions court.
The high court was informed that the matter had already been taken to the sessions court which had advised the police to seek help from the high court, but the investigation officer was told to file an appeal against the sessions court’s refusal order. However, the issue compounded when the police realised there was no written order by the session court that it could appeal against.
The ultimate sufferer was the victim in the robbery case, Naseera Fatima, whose car, ATM card and other important documents were stolen from her house early this month. The burglars broke into her house and made away with the items. Before Fatima could block her ATM card, the robbers had used it to withdraw Rs25,000 from her account.
Since there were no written orders by the sessions court, the police were denied key evidence against the suspects. The police were left on their own to figure out a solution to the problem.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 20th, 2011.