Turf war of beggars lands in court

Sidewalk squabble ends in legal laughter as judge throws out the petition

KARACHI:

In a courtroom drama that could rival any daytime TV show, the saga of the sidewalk squabble between two groups of beggars took center stage. Additional Sessions Judge 3, Sohail Ahmed Mashori, played the role of the no-nonsense judge as he dismissed the petition faster than you can say "spare change."

Rival beggars had harassed the petitioner, a beggar woman named Ameer Khatoon, at gunpoint to vacate a lucrative spot at a bus spot. Ameer Khatoon, through her lawyer, had sought filing of FIR against the nominated accused, who wanted to evict her from her regular begging place.

Mashori's verdict left no room for debate, stating that the footpath of the city isn't exactly up for grabs, even for the most persuasive panhandlers. He made it clear that when it comes to sidewalk real estate, possession isn't just nine-tenths of the law, it's the whole enchilada.

The courtroom erupted in disbelief as Mashori dropped the mic, declaring that there was no land or ownership dispute, just a case of beggars dividing themselves into teams like it's a game of pick-up basketball.

The court went on to highlight the sheer absurdity of turning societal squabbles into legal brouhahas. In a shocking turn of events, the court declined to treat the issue as a high-stakes legal battle over prime real estate. Instead, they reminded everyone that sidewalks are first come, first served, and nobody gets to claim spare change.

In a poignant moment of clarity, court acknowledged that the law is not made to deal with every social hiccup. It's like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

Judge Sohail Ahmed Mashori hearing the petition of Ameer Khatoon versus Shafi Muhammad Punhal, Nazeer Gul Muhammad, Meer GuI Khamiso and two unknown accused persons said the matter was not admissible for hearing, however it raised many social issues.

SSP Complaint Cell Saeedabad and Saeedad police station SHO were also among the proposed accused.

The beggar woman named Ameer Khatoon had acquired the services of Advocate Attaullah Bhutto, while ADPP Muhamamd Ashraf Qaiser represented the State.

Judge Mashori stated that in the case of petitioner Ameer Khatoon vs Shari Muhammad and three others, the police report reveals rivalry of territorial encroachments not upon lands of lush greenery or sprawling estates, but upon the bustling concrete patches deemed most lucrative for the age-old profession of panhandling.

Petitioner claims that on 21.03.2024 at 6am while she was present at bus stop meanwhile, four above named proposed accused persons harassed her at gun point hence FIR may be lodged.

On receipt of this complaint report was called from SSP Complaint cell based which was forwarded to SHO Saeedabad Karachi by him. The report of SHO dated 19.04.2024 reveals that both parties are baggers filing complaints against each other. The State's ADPP contends that the dispute pertains not to verdant lands or estates, but to densely populated urban areas prized for panhandling, highlighting the significance of territorial boundaries in the legal context.

Let it be noted, the chronicles of our police force-keepers of peace and counters of more tangible trespasses-have elucidated that the complainant, petitioner and proposed accused share a profession that is as old as time but as legally tenuous as a house of cards in a stiff breeze: that of begging. While the heart of this court beats in sympathy with the strife and struggles of those compelled to seek charity at the mercy of passersby, it is bound by the unyielding chains of the law, which, in its current state, deems the act of begging not as a rightful claim to a patch of pavement but as an activity falling outside the embrace of legal sanction.

"Thus, with the weighty gavel of justice in one hand and a quill for recording decisions in the other (figuratively speaking, since we now use computers), I am compelled to dismiss the application filed by Ms Petitioner," the judge wrote.

It is not within this court's power to adjudicate turf wars over territory that, under the letter of the law, neither party may rightfully claim. However, let it not be said that justice is blind to the plight of its supplicants. This dismissal does not come without a stern recommendation to the powers that be: to cast a compassionate and reformative eye upon our societal structures that push individuals to vie over pavement pieces as sources of sustenance. Therefore, the case is dismissed, but not without a whispered word of hope that perhaps, one day, we may find a solution that elevates all, leaving none to quarrel over crumbs. May peace and prosperity find both parties away from the contested concrete, it is so ordered, with hint of hope and a dash of judicial solemnity, Judge Mashori said dropping the hammer on the gavel.

Published in The Express Tribune, April 20^th, 2024.