Two hundred and sixty people were killed in the fire at Ali Enterprises garments factory in Baldia Town on September 11, 2012. The incident earlier deemed an accident, in which casualties multiplied due to the lack of safety measures, was recently termed an act of arson over non-payment of extortion. PHOTO: FILE
The restraining order came on petitions filed by Dr Abdul Sattar Khan and Iqbal Adeeb Khanum, who had approached the SHC against the police for nominating them in the case and declaring them absconders.
The petitioners' lawyer, Advocate Hassaan Sabir, argued that his clients had business partnership with owners of the Ali Enterprises, a readymade garments manufacturing factory which was set on fire in September 2012. He said the Bhaila brothers, the factory's owners, had made payments to the petitioners which they spent on buying properties in Hyderabad.
PTI ask SHC to unveil reports on Baldia fire, Uzair Baloch
The lawyer informed the judges that the investigation officer (IO) of the case had nominated the petitioners as co-accused in the Baldia factory fire case.
As many as 259 workers perished when a deadly fire engulfed the multi-storey Ali Enterprises building. Later, the Rangers filed a joint investigation report, which stated that Rehman Bhola and others had set the factory on fire after its owners did not pay Rs500 million in extortion to the brother of then chief of the Karachi Tanzeemi Committee of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement.
Advocate Sabir argued that his clients had no role in the commission of the alleged offence, yet the police nominated them in the case and declared them absconders after which the concerned anti-terrorism court (ATC) issued warrants for the arrest of Dr Khan and Khanum.
Labour activists decry exploitation of workforce
The court was pleaded to suspend the arrest warrants issued by of the ATC and restrain the police from taking any action against the petitioners.
On the other hand, the special prosecutor, Sajid Mehboob Sheikh, argued that the trial was already suffering delays in the trial court since the petitioners had filed petitions in the high court. The prosecutor pleaded to the court to issue the final order on the pleas at the earliest so that the trial might not suffer from delays.
Approving the petitioners' request, the judges restrained the IO from taking any action against the petitioners till further orders.
Meanwhile, the lawyer for the other petitioner, Ali Hasan, could not appear before the court. The bench adjourned the hearing till November 11.
1732434981-0/BeFunky-collage-(10)1732434981-0-405x300.webp "article")
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ