The inquiry had followed an incident where a prisoner claimed being served food containing a ‘human finger’.
The superintendent, Malik Muhammad Mushtaq, had been found guilty of criminal negligence in the inquiry conducted by the Home Department. Now he has become the complainant against the officials, who are thought to be taking the fall for him, in a criminal case registered at the Kot Lakhpat police station.
The police have arrested Muhammad Aslam, the assistant superintendent (for langar) and Saleh Zia the jail storekeeper. The third accused Mian Muhammad Ashraf, the contractor, is still at large. A case has been registered against the accused under Sections 269, 271, 272 and 273 of the Pakistan Penal Code (that deal with negligence likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life, breach of quarantine rules, adulteration of food or drink intended for sale and sale of noxious food or drink respectively) and Section 39-A of the Telegraph Act (that deals with a person misusing a phone and threatening some one).
A jail official, requesting not to be named, said that the superintendent had been spared because he was well-connected. Malik Mushtaq was not available for comments.
During Sehri on August 27, the prisoners of barrack 10-A had protested after a man claimed that his food contained a human finger. The claim had been followed by various complaints by the prisoners about unhygienic food. The home secretary had then ordered an inquiry to investigate the claims.
The inquiry team recorded statements from other prisoners who testified that there had been a human finger in the food. They had told the team that the matter had been hushed up by the management. The meal inspection record for the date was silent on the complaint.
The prisoners’ objections were backed up by the medical officer (MO) of Central Jail. The MO said that he had told the authorities many times that unhygienic meat was being supplied by the contractor. Corresponding reports were found in the meal inspection register but there had been no action to redress that.
The Home Department inquiry recommended that the superintendent be transferred for his “continuous criminal negligence, maladministration and non compliance with standards in running the affairs of jail in an efficient and transparent manner.”
It was also recommended that disciplinary proceedings may be initiated against the superintendent under Punjab Employees Efficiency, Discipline and Accountability (PEEDA) Act and for violation of Rules 504 and 506 of the Punjab Prison Rules, 1978.The report also suggested that criminal proceedings may be initiated against the contractor for supplying unhygienic meat and the MO, the store keeper and the assistant superintendent (posted on Langar) under PEEDA Act, 2006.
The inquiry had also held the jail administration responsible for corruption and embezzlement.
Published in The Express Tribune, September 9th, 2010.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ