SHC wants missing person recovered by August 30

NAB put on notice over Sharjeel Memon's plea for refund of bail amount


Our Correspondent August 04, 2018
Sindh High Court. PHOTO: EXPRESS

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) issued on Friday notices to the Sindh government, inspector-general (IG) of police, Rangers director-general and others in a missing person case.

A two-member bench heard the matter. The court ordered the authorities to recover the missing Ateequr Rehman by August 30 and submit a report.

A counsel for the petitioner maintained that Rehman was whisked away by security officials in plainclothes from Lyari. The court was informed that the life of the missing person was at stake.

The bench asked the authorities who should be held responsible for whisking away people and ordered them to ensure the save recovery of Rehman by August 30.

Petition to ban political rallies on May 12 filed in SHC

 

Sharjeel Memon's plea

The SHC also put the National Accountability Bureau and others on notice on a plea of former information minister Sharjeel Memon in connection with refund of money he had deposited for interim bail.

Memon's lawyer maintained that since his client had been arrested and sent to jail, money amounting Rs4 million that he had earlier deposited against interim bail should be returned.

The court directed the NAB prosecutor and others to submit their response by August 15.

The former minister is a suspect in a Rs5.76 billion corruption reference. He was arrested in October last year when the SHC cancelled his bail.

SHC seeks detailed report on Murad Ali Shah's iqama

Trader's harassment

The SHC issued notices to the IG, East DIG, Mehmoodabad SHO and others to submit replies on an application against some police officers who were allegedly harassing a trader.

A counsel for the petitioner informed the court that the head constable of the Mehmoodabad police station and a constable had staged a fake raid on the shop of his client, Zeeshan, and snatched his licensed weapon along with the licensing documents. The lawyer claimed that the police officials had been blackmailing his client since then and threatening him with filing a case against him.

The court came down hard on the police department, stating that it was deplorable to see its officials involved in blackmailing. "Who would provide security if police officers themselves engage in blackmailing?" the bench asked.

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