Investigation and justice

Reforming and modernising the policing system in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa has remained the most vociferous claim of Imran Khan and his party. The proof of pudding is in the eating: we discover the truth once we pass a claim through the filter of our experiential knowledge. A recent incident where I witnessed the working of the police serves as a good case study to appraise the claim of change in the policing system.

An employee of a local university was working on the campus when he got booked in a murder case that had taken place in his hometown, Karak. The accused produced evidence before the police that he had been falsely implicated in the case due to a past family feud. The evidence included CCTV footages that showed his presence in the university at the time of occurrence of the crime. In such cases, threat of nominating in the FIR is often used by lower-cadre policemen as a way to mint money from both parties. But what is even more unfortunate in the case of this university employee is that even senior officers acted mechanically and failed to apply their own mind to serve the demands of justice. The accused was advised by the SP Investigation to obtain bail before arrest from the court. The systemic failure, in this case study, could be seen from the highest office to the lower echelons, as a blind eye was turned to the clear evidence of the impossibility of the accused being present at the crime scene at the time of its occurrence.

Courts can dispense justice in the true sense of the term only if truthful presentation of the facts is made by an investigating officer. In this regard, while FIR is an important document, it is the job of an investigating officer to sift truth from malicious allegations. The essence of reforming the police is to create a system where no one is prevented from lodging an FIR and no one is deprived of the fundamental rights of freedom and inviolability of human dignity because of malicious allegations. The investigation officer’s job is, therefore, the litmus test of whether any meaningful change has happened or not. The case study, serving as a litmus test, doesn’t provide any credible evidence that our policing has changed for the better. Treating FIR as a gospel of truth, our higher- and lower-ranking officers still do not have the courage to apply their own mind and only force an already distressed person to go through the ordeal of obtaining the bail before arrest even if they know the person is innocent. The police need to treat their role in the system more sensitively and not leave the duty of rescuing an innocent person from the jaws of malicious prosecution at the courts alone. Courts are the culmination of the justice system. The police would be doing their job efficiently and conscientiously if they do not arrest someone till sufficient evidence is gathered in support of any FIR. In the case study, the investigating officer could have easily verified the facts if he had visited the university and checked the attendance record and seen the CCTV footages.

Smooth functioning of the criminal justice system ensures conducive environment that is needed for the enjoyment of our fundamental rights and good things of life. The efficacy of the system depends on careful selection of personnel having the right capacity, courage of conviction and integrity. Absence of any of these essentials results in impairment of the justice system. Commission of any offence injuring the rights of another citizen disturbs the whole society. Therefore, bringing the offender to justice is the duty of the state. However, we must remain cognisant of the fact as well that our social setup has many families that are embroiled in blood feuds and never miss a chance of roping in innocent members of the opponent’s family.

The courts single-handedly cannot deliver justice. The chariot of justice has three wheels — court, investigation and prosecution. In fact, justice begins its journey when an FIR is lodged in a police station. The FIR could be true, false or manipulated. The task of the investigators under the Criminal Procedure Code is to collect evidence about the guilt or innocence of the charged person. Investigation essentially is to find out the truth and to separate the grain from the chaff. Without procuring sufficient evidence either in support of the act or its negation, the prosecution will not be able to justly argue the case. Similarly in an adversarial system of justice which we have, the court will be unable to render justice.

The Supreme Court and High Courts have laid down that the FIR is not always the gospel of truth. The investigating officer is required not to blindly follow the FIR when falsehood is floating on the surface in view of available evidence. The police fail in this basic duty on account of ineptness, low capacity to know the basic laws, cowardice, corruption and poor supervision from top to bottom. Enhancing the authority of the head of the police — and nor intermittently changing the IG — can change anything. What matters to a common citizen is whether justice is available or not. When justice is delayed and hence denied, the pomp of police reforms becomes meaningless.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 29^th, 2020.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.