Apex court: Missing man’s sister challenges BHC decision
Provincial government, ISI, MI party to the case.
Provincial government, ISI, MI party to the case. PHOTO: FILE
ISLAMABAD:
An activist of the Voice for Baloch Missing Persons (VBMP) has approached the Supreme Court on Tuesday regarding the recovery of her missing brother.
Farzana Majeed through her counsel Rifaqat Hussain Shah challenged the Balochistan High Court’s October 22, 2013 order, wherein her brother Zakir Majeed has been declared absconder after he was released on bail on November 17, 2008.
Citing Article 199 of the Constitution she challenged the BHC’s order making the provincial government, ISI, MI and others parties to the case. She filed her petition claiming that her brother was abducted by people of the agencies and was kept in their custody from Khuzdar.
The petition adds that the sister of the missing person, Zakir Majid, was protesting in front of the Quetta Press Club and took part in the long march and walked from Quetta to Islamabad to lodge her protest.
“The Division bench in the high court instead of pointing out the whereabouts of the citizen has dismissed the petition on the sole ground that since FIR was lodged thus he was not abducted rather jumped off of the case”, it added.
The petitioner objected to BHC’s observation that her brother had gone into hiding and said that there was ample evidence to show that respondents had arrested him.
The petitioner further argued that the BHC should have refrained from passing any order while the case was sub judice before the Supreme Court.
The petition further questioned whether BHC has conducted a fair trial as per Article-10A of the Constitution.
The VBMP chairman Nasrullah Baloch, appearing before the Supreme Court bench on March 26 requested it to take up the matter related to enforced disappearance of Zakir Majeed.
The court, however, told him that according to BHC’s decision, Zakir Majeed was an absconder, who after his release on bail on November 17, 2008, skipped his bail and did not appear before the court. The bench, however, suggested it could consider the case, if the VBMP chairman challenged BHC’s decision.
An activist of the Voice for Baloch Missing Persons (VBMP) has approached the Supreme Court on Tuesday regarding the recovery of her missing brother.
Farzana Majeed through her counsel Rifaqat Hussain Shah challenged the Balochistan High Court’s October 22, 2013 order, wherein her brother Zakir Majeed has been declared absconder after he was released on bail on November 17, 2008.
Citing Article 199 of the Constitution she challenged the BHC’s order making the provincial government, ISI, MI and others parties to the case. She filed her petition claiming that her brother was abducted by people of the agencies and was kept in their custody from Khuzdar.
The petition adds that the sister of the missing person, Zakir Majid, was protesting in front of the Quetta Press Club and took part in the long march and walked from Quetta to Islamabad to lodge her protest.
“The Division bench in the high court instead of pointing out the whereabouts of the citizen has dismissed the petition on the sole ground that since FIR was lodged thus he was not abducted rather jumped off of the case”, it added.
The petitioner objected to BHC’s observation that her brother had gone into hiding and said that there was ample evidence to show that respondents had arrested him.
The petitioner further argued that the BHC should have refrained from passing any order while the case was sub judice before the Supreme Court.
The petition further questioned whether BHC has conducted a fair trial as per Article-10A of the Constitution.
The VBMP chairman Nasrullah Baloch, appearing before the Supreme Court bench on March 26 requested it to take up the matter related to enforced disappearance of Zakir Majeed.
The court, however, told him that according to BHC’s decision, Zakir Majeed was an absconder, who after his release on bail on November 17, 2008, skipped his bail and did not appear before the court. The bench, however, suggested it could consider the case, if the VBMP chairman challenged BHC’s decision.