AGL36.99▼ -0.12 (0.00%)AIRLINK208.5▼ -4.32 (-0.02%)BOP10.24▼ -0.01 (0.00%)CNERGY6.8▼ -0.2 (-0.03%)DCL8.68▼ -0.06 (-0.01%)DFML38.6▼ -0.09 (0.00%)DGKC96.8▼ -0.65 (-0.01%)FCCL33.59▲ 0.12 (0.00%)FFL17.15▼ -0.49 (-0.03%)HUBC128.4▼ -0.71 (-0.01%)HUMNL14.01▲ 0.15 (0.01%)KEL4.71▼ -0.15 (-0.03%)KOSM6.82▼ -0.11 (-0.02%)MLCF42.85▼ -0.78 (-0.02%)NBP60.5▼ -0.89 (-0.01%)OGDC214.15▲ 1.2 (0.01%)PAEL42.11▲ 0.94 (0.02%)PIBTL8.44▼ -0.19 (-0.02%)PPL185.21▲ 2.18 (0.01%)PRL39.18▼ -0.45 (-0.01%)PTC24.8▲ 0.07 (0.00%)SEARL98.44▲ 0.43 (0.00%)TELE9.15▲ 0.15 (0.02%)TOMCL35.05▼ -0.14 (0.00%)TPLP12.24▼ -0.16 (-0.01%)TREET23.05▼ -0.57 (-0.02%)TRG65.45▼ -0.23 (0.00%)UNITY33.66▼ -0.32 (-0.01%)WTL1.88▲ 0.09 (0.05%)

Court denies bail to ex-SHO, nine others in triple murder case

Share
Tweet
WhatsApp
Share on Linkedin
[tta_listen_btn]

 

An additional district & sessions court (West) on Thursday dismissed the bail applications of former Jauharabad station house officer (SHO) and others in a triple murder case, and observed that the offence falls within the ambit of the Anti-Terrorism Act.

Former Jauharabad SHO Ghayoor Abbas and nine others had filed their post-arrest bail application in connection with their arrest in a triple murder case of last year.

According to the prosecution, accused Syed Mohammad had used criminal force with the assistance of the then Jauharabad SHO to forcibly obtain the possession of a plot from Nisar Shah and others in the Manghopir area on December 12, 2021.

The prosecution claimed that the SHO, his police party and the accused party reached the subject property to evict the complainant party from the plot, where a clash erupted between them.

The prosecution claimed that one of the accused fired at the complainant party, resulting in Abdullah, his father Shabbir Ahmed and a man named Saleh Mohammad dying on the spot, while police constable Kamil Abbas suffered a gunshot to the leg and two others were also injured.

After hearing the arguments and the perusal of the police record, the court observed that the officials concerned had not bothered to consider whether the case would be tried in a sessions court or in an anti-terrorism court.

The court observed that there was a dispute between the parties in respect of the house situated in Peerabad Colony, and accused Syed Mohammad had purchased the said property from Ibrahim Shah, but his son Iqbal Shah and paternal grandson Nisar Shah refused to hand over its possession, and a case was pending before a civil court for adjudicating.

The court observed that the record of the case shows that the then Jauharabad SHO and other police officials colluded with the accused party to get the property vacated in official capacity and went beyond the jurisdiction of their police station.

The court observed that the content of the charge sheet clearly shows that accused Syed Mohammad used criminal force with the assistance of the then Jauharabad SHO and other police officials to forcibly obtain the plot’s possession from Nasir Shah and others.

The court observed that the presence of police officials who were nominated as accused in the case create fear and insecurity among the people and society, as the possession of the property had been tried to be obtained by force through police officials of the police stations having no jurisdiction.The court observed that if police officials had not accompanied the private persons, neither a sense of fear and insecurity would have been created nor such an incident would have occurred.

The court observed that it is crystal clear that the offence falls within the ambit of the Anti-Terrorism Act, and dismissed the bail applications for want of jurisdiction. The court observed that the sessions court has no administrative authority to transfer the case, and no case is pending in the subject FIR, so the transfer of case is also dismissed.

Related Posts

Get Alerts