SHC orders formation of JIT for missing persons

Verdict reserved on bail pleas of former chief secretary and others in land allotment case


Our Correspondent May 24, 2018
Sindh High Court. PHOTO: EXPRESS

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) ordered on Wednesday the formation of a joint investigation team (JIT) for the recovery of a missing worker of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM), Sarfaraz, and others.

A two-member bench of the SHC also directed the authorities to take strict measures for the recoveries of missing persons.

The court expressed its dissatisfaction over the performance of the police in missing persons cases. A person has been missing for the past seven years but the police and home ministry have not done anything, the bench remarked.

Saddar DSP Waqar Khan informed the SHC that the police had asked the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P) government for help regarding the missing persons, to which the court remarked that the police did not bother to ask the K-P government for seven years.  A citizen said a year had passed since his brother Salman was whisked away and the family had no idea of his whereabouts.

Directing the police and other departments to ensure the recovery of missing persons, the SHC ordered the formation of a JIT and adjourned the hearing.

High court seeks NAB chairperson's reply

 

Order reserved

The SHC also reserved its decision on the bail pleas of former chief secretary Siddique Memon and others in a case of illegal allotment of land.

Memon and others have been accused of illegally allotting six acres of land in Korangi through fake documents, causing a loss of more than Rs5.5 million to the national exchequer. The allotment was cancelled on January 22, 2016.

A two-member bench heard the matter on Wednesday. Memon and the other accused, including former land utilisation additional secretary Abdul Qadir Memon, attended the hearing where their lawyers concluded their arguments.

SHC grants Chinese national bail

During the proceedings, some of the accused left the court. The bench asked where the accused had gone and remarked that if they did not reappear within a few minutes, it would reject their bail pleas outright.

The lawyer of an accused, Ghulam Mustafa Suhag, contended that his client had nothing to do with the illegal allotment of land, to which a prosecutor replied that there was concrete and undeniable evidence against the accused. The prosecutor argued that the accused did not deserve bail. He requested the court to reject their bail pleas.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ