KARACHI: SHC sets aside ATC order on action against cops
By Our Reporter
KARACHI, Jan 21: An anti-terrorism appellate bench of the Sindh High Court set aside on Monday the order of the administrative judge for the anti- terrorism courts through which he had directed the trial court to take action against three police officials in a kidnapping for ransom case.
The bench comprising, Justice Ghulam Nabi Soomro and Justice Ashraf Leghari, held that “the AJ (administrative judge) is not competent to review his own order dated December 3, 2001 or in any case it was not within his domain to act as a trial court.”
Three police officials, who were aggrieved by an order of the administrative judge for the ATCs, directing the trial court to take action against them under section 27 of the ATA, in case No 218/2001, had filed revision application with the Sindh High Court.
The appellate bench held that “the provisions of section 27 of the AT Act of 1997 lays down that such function can be carried out by the trial court or the High Court.”
The applicants were Chaudhary Anwar Ali Punno, subdivisional police officer, Liaquatabad, Afaq Ahmed, SHO Sharifabad, and Ejaz Ahmed, SI posted at Sharifabad police station, were represented by Khwaja Naveed Ahmed, advocate.
The applicants’ counsel had contended that under the AT Act of 1997 the administrative judge was not authorized to direct the trial court to take action against police officers u/s 27 of the AT Act. The directions amounted to interference in independent and fair trail of the case by the trial court.
The trial court was not empowered to prejudge the case before framing of charges, and take action against them, under the above mentioned section.
The applicants had also claimed that the show-cause notice issued to them was illegal and not maintainable.
It was their contention that record and proceedings of the above-mentioned case should be recalled from the court of special judge of the anti-terrorism court No II, who had issued show-cause notices to them, prior to holding of trial and recording evidence.
The show cause was issued pertaining to the complaint of Abdul Majeed lodged at Sharifabad police station about the abduction of his three-year-old daughter, Ramsha, by unknown persons on November 13, 2001. Subsequently, police had arrested three persons, Zahid, Faisal and Ms Urooj.
During investigation, Zahid had confessed the crime, but his wife Urooj was found to be innocent. According to police, she was acting under the pressure of her husband and did not share the common intention with other co-accused.
Police, accordingly, submitted report under section 169 of CrPC before the administrative judge, who ordered release of Ms Urooj. Thereafter, the case was transferred to the court of special judge of the anti-terrorism court No II who sent reference to the administrative judge for recalling of the order.
The administrative judge, while recalling the order, had held that the three applicants were “to be dealt within terms of section 27 of the AT Act for defective investigation which resulted in submission of report u/s 169 of CrPC. The action in terms of section 27 was to be taken against delinquent officers during the course or at the conclusion of the trial. Therefore, the trial court to deal with above-named persons in terms of section 27 of the Act who is at liberty to take action against other officials, if found responsible for such delinquency.”
