KARACHI: Justice Bhajandas Tejwani of the Sindh High Court (SHC) disposed off on Tuesday a criminal miscellaneous application questioning a judgment by the district and sessions judge, Malir, who rejected an application for the registration of an FIR against police and owners of a building complex for the alleged invasion of Chappal Sun City and the killing of two flood affectees, including a 14-year-old boy.
The application was filed by the brother of the deceased Ghulam Muhammad, who nominated Gulshan-e-Iqbal’s ASPs, SPOs and a number of SHOs (from Gulistan-e-Jauhar, Aziz Bhatti, Mubina Town etc) and the builders, namely Muhammad Rauf Chappal, Asif Qadri, Latif Choudhry, Haji Rauf and Haji Yaqoob.The incident occured on Aug 23, 2010. The petitioner alleges that the raiding party attempted to get flood survivors to vacate the residential complex on the orders of the then CCPO Waseem Ahmed and the DG Rangers. He maintains that the raiding party resorted to brute force and opened fire on the flood victims, killing Ghulam Muhammad (14) and Ayaz and therefore a case needs to be registered against them under the relevant sections.
The sessions court had, while deciding the application, ordered that as an FIR (709/2010) was registered, the applicant could join the investigation and the investigating officer shall also record his statement and proceed as per law.
The applicant, dissatisfied with the order of the DJ Malir, moved an instant application.
The SHC bench heard the counsel for the applicant and additional advocate general (AAG) and also perused the written reply from the police, who said that the investigation was under way by the station investigation officer.
“During the course of the hearing, the SHO of Sachal PS stated that he was ready to record the version of the petitioner,” the court said in its order, noting that after this statement by the SHO the petitioner did not press the application.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 27th, 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