SHC disposes of plea against sale, manufacture of ‘faulty bomb detectors’

Air Force Security claims no complaints have been received by agencies which bought the detector


​ Our Correspondent December 12, 2019
PHOTO: Reuters

KARACHI: A two-member bench of the Sindh High Court (SHC), comprising Justice Mazhar and Justice Agha Faisal disposed of on Wednesday the plea pertaining to the manufacture and sale of Khoji, an allegedly defective bomb detector, by the Airport Security Force (ASF). The ASF submitted its reply before the court.

The plea maintained that ASF has made a bomb detector named Khoji, which they are selling for Rs70,000. According to the petitioner, experts have declared the detector to be incapable of performing its function. These detectors are being given to various airports, in other sensitive areas and several private organisations, stated the petition, praying the court to prevent the sale and manufacture of such detectors, which have been termed as dangerous for human lives.

The petition further states that the detector was earlier being manufactured in Britain, but it has now been banned. According to the petition, a court in Britain declared that the inventor of this device was cruel and was inflicting danger on human lives. Golf ball detectors, worth $20 each, were being sold in Iraq at the price of £5,000 each, and thousands of lives were lost due to the use of fake technology, it added. The petition maintained that defected detectors were being made in Pakistan using the same fake technology.

Three FC personnel martyred in Quetta motorbike bomb blast

According to the ASF response, submitted before the court, none of the agencies that have bought Khoji have complained about its quality.

The petitioner's counsel, Advocate Abdul Moiz Jaffery, argued that the process of preparing Khoji was fraudulent. He argued that the country's airports and shopping malls are not secure due to Khoji. The court inquired whether the petitioner had an alternative security tool to suggest. At this, the petitioner's counsel said that sniffer dogs are used all over the world.

How will such large numbers of sniffer dogs be acquired to replace bomb detector devices, asked the bench.  The plea against the allegedly faulty bomb detector was disposed of.

Lack of evidence

Another two-member bench headed by SHC Chief Justice Ahmed Ali Shaikh and comprising Justice Omar Sial disposed of former federal minister Zafar Laghari's plea, after receiving the National Accountability Bureau's (NAB) reply. The bench was hearing the case against Laghari pertaining to assets beyond means.

NAB officials informed the court that no evidence was found against the former federal minister. The anti-graft watchdog closed another inquiry due to a lack of evidence.

Have the fear of the Almighty, remarked the bench, while observing that Laghari was a 90-year-old man.

Rickshaw bomb blast in Lahore injures 10

After NAB's reply, the court disposed of the former minister's plea.

Rehan murder case

Meanwhile, a two-member bench comprising Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro and Justice Abdul Mobin Lakho directed the counsels of the accused to ensure their presence at the next hearing of the case pertaining to the torture and murder of alleged thief Rehan, 14.

The bench heard the plea filed by Rehan's family, praying the court to include sections of the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) in the case and to set-up a joint investigation team (JIT). The plea maintained that the police were not cooperating. It argued that the way Rehan was tortured to death came under terrorism and the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) director should be directed to register a case under cybercrime laws as well as a video that was made of Rehan, which went viral on social media.

The court adjourned the hearing till December 23 due to the absence of the defence lawyers.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 12th, 2019.

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