Taxi driver’s murder: No headway after wife’s withdrawal application returned
Police fail to submit charge sheet, IO does not appear before ATC before deadline.
Mureed Ali alias Murad Ali, a 36-year-old taxi driver, was allegedly shot by Rangers personnel near his Gulistan-e-Jauhar residence. PHOTO: FILE
KARACHI:
The police have failed to submit a charge sheet within time against the four Rangers personnel facing charges of killing a taxi driver in an ‘extrajudicial’ manner, The Express Tribune learnt on Friday.
Also, the investigating officer of the case never appeared before an anti-terrorism court (ATC) let alone issue an intimation notice to the court about the delay, if any, faced during the course of investigations since the sections of the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA), 1997, were added on the directions of the apex court, said court sources.
On July 16, Mureed Ali alias Murad Ali, a 36-year-old taxi driver, was allegedly shot by Rangers personnel near his Gulistan-e-Jauhar residence for reportedly not stopping his vehicle after he was signalled to do so.
Lance Naik Ghulam Rasool, Barkat, Sepoy Waqar and Nazeer of Pakistan Rangers, Sindh, have been booked and arrested for their alleged involvement in the murder of the unarmed taxi driver. The suspects are in jail on judicial remand.
“It’s an old case,” said the investigation officer, Inspector Fareed. “Ask about the hottest issue these days - the Safari Park police encounter case.” Fareed said that the prime reason behind the delay was the late submission of the report of the Joint Investigation Team (JIT), adding that the medical, chemical and forensic science lab reports were also not received on time.
The law states, however, that the JIT shall complete investigation within seven working days and forward directly to the ATC a report under Section173 of the code.
“There is no negligence. An expedient solution is under consideration,” said Fareed, while accepting that the allocated time of 30 days for submitting a charge sheet in the ATC was over.
“Any default on the part of an officer-in-charge of a police station, an investigating officer or any other person required by law to perform any functions in connection with the investigation, that results in, or has the effect of delaying investigation or submission of the report under sub-section (1) shall be deemed to be a willful disobedience of the order of the special court and the person committing default shall be liable to be punished for contempt of court,” states the law.
The Supreme Court after taking the suo motu notice had ruled that the suspects should be put on trial under the ATA with directions to the attorney general of Pakistan, Muneer A Malik, to supervise the investigations and hold consultations with the prosecutor general and the advocate general of Sindh.
The prosecutor general of Sindh, Shahadat Awan, however, was unaware of the current status of the case. “It’s a district-level case,” he said, “I’m not the right person to ask, you should ask the investigating officer about the case.”
The lapses in the case have given rise to apprehensions that the dead man’s family would not get justice. On the other hand, the widow of the taxi driver, also the complainant, had submitted an application and an undertaking that she had unconditionally forgiven the suspects and was willing to withdraw the case.
The magistrate had, however, returned the application with a direction to approach the court concerned, where neither the woman nor the IO has appeared so far.
The family which gained media’s attention after the incident is now reluctant to talk to the media. They refused to comment when contacted. The sources believe that the family was under the pressure of the paramilitary force.
A case, no.468/13, under sections 302 (premeditated murder) and 34 (common intention) of the Pakistan Penal Code read with section 7 of ATA, 1997, was registered at the Gulistan-e-Jauhar police station.
Published in The Express Tribune, September 7th, 2013.
The police have failed to submit a charge sheet within time against the four Rangers personnel facing charges of killing a taxi driver in an ‘extrajudicial’ manner, The Express Tribune learnt on Friday.
Also, the investigating officer of the case never appeared before an anti-terrorism court (ATC) let alone issue an intimation notice to the court about the delay, if any, faced during the course of investigations since the sections of the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA), 1997, were added on the directions of the apex court, said court sources.
On July 16, Mureed Ali alias Murad Ali, a 36-year-old taxi driver, was allegedly shot by Rangers personnel near his Gulistan-e-Jauhar residence for reportedly not stopping his vehicle after he was signalled to do so.
Lance Naik Ghulam Rasool, Barkat, Sepoy Waqar and Nazeer of Pakistan Rangers, Sindh, have been booked and arrested for their alleged involvement in the murder of the unarmed taxi driver. The suspects are in jail on judicial remand.
“It’s an old case,” said the investigation officer, Inspector Fareed. “Ask about the hottest issue these days - the Safari Park police encounter case.” Fareed said that the prime reason behind the delay was the late submission of the report of the Joint Investigation Team (JIT), adding that the medical, chemical and forensic science lab reports were also not received on time.
The law states, however, that the JIT shall complete investigation within seven working days and forward directly to the ATC a report under Section173 of the code.
“There is no negligence. An expedient solution is under consideration,” said Fareed, while accepting that the allocated time of 30 days for submitting a charge sheet in the ATC was over.
“Any default on the part of an officer-in-charge of a police station, an investigating officer or any other person required by law to perform any functions in connection with the investigation, that results in, or has the effect of delaying investigation or submission of the report under sub-section (1) shall be deemed to be a willful disobedience of the order of the special court and the person committing default shall be liable to be punished for contempt of court,” states the law.
The Supreme Court after taking the suo motu notice had ruled that the suspects should be put on trial under the ATA with directions to the attorney general of Pakistan, Muneer A Malik, to supervise the investigations and hold consultations with the prosecutor general and the advocate general of Sindh.
The prosecutor general of Sindh, Shahadat Awan, however, was unaware of the current status of the case. “It’s a district-level case,” he said, “I’m not the right person to ask, you should ask the investigating officer about the case.”
The lapses in the case have given rise to apprehensions that the dead man’s family would not get justice. On the other hand, the widow of the taxi driver, also the complainant, had submitted an application and an undertaking that she had unconditionally forgiven the suspects and was willing to withdraw the case.
The magistrate had, however, returned the application with a direction to approach the court concerned, where neither the woman nor the IO has appeared so far.
The family which gained media’s attention after the incident is now reluctant to talk to the media. They refused to comment when contacted. The sources believe that the family was under the pressure of the paramilitary force.
A case, no.468/13, under sections 302 (premeditated murder) and 34 (common intention) of the Pakistan Penal Code read with section 7 of ATA, 1997, was registered at the Gulistan-e-Jauhar police station.
Published in The Express Tribune, September 7th, 2013.