KARACHI: 35pc court production orders not carried out: Shortage of vans, staff
By Tahir Siddiqui
KARACHI, Dec 31: Justice is not only delayed but is ostensibly being denied as the authorities fail to produce a large number of the under-trial prisoners in the respective courts. They simply don’t have the means for the task.
The court police, still attached administratively to the police department, have a ridiculously small fleet of prisoners’ vans and a meagre strength of staffers to transport over 400 UTPs daily from different penitentiaries to over 160 courts.
Inquiries showed that courts in the five judicial districts issued in 2002 over 110,000 orders for the production of around 7,000 UTPs lodged at the Central Prison, Karachi, District Jail Malir, Juvenile Jail and Women Jail. However, more than 38,000 — or about 35 per cent of the total production orders — were not complied with.
According to the data collated from the central prison, the courts issued 76,665 orders for the production of the UTPs during the year under review. However, 49,504, or a little over 64 per cent production orders, were complied with.
Inquiries revealed that the production rate of the UTPs lodged at the District Jail, Malir — better known as Landhi Jail — was about 69 per cent as 25,915 out of the total 37,500 production orders were complied with during 2002.
The jail authorities said the courts always issued show-cause notices to them for the non-production of the UTPs even though it was the responsibility of the court police to transport the prisoners from the jail to the courts.
The Sindh prisons’ chief, Brig Nisar Maher, said the issuance of show-cause and contempt of court notices to the jail authorities by the courts was unfair as the court police, who were assigned the task of the UTP’s transportation, had still not come under the administrative control of the jail administration.
He told Dawn that the decision to place the court police under the administrative control of the jail administration had already been taken and the government had even released Rs41 million to the home department for the purchase of prisoners’ vans of different capacities.
“I am sure we will be able to ensure 100 per cent production of the UTPs in the courts once the court police become part of the jail administration”, he said.
The court police, now headed by a superintendent of police, has the strength of around 415 personnel with only eight prisoners’ van in order. Ironically, the court police staff include about 35 drivers, most of whom sit idle.
According to the inquiries, an average of 400 UTPs are required to be produced before the courts daily. The jail authorities said the task could not be achieved with the present staff and vans.
Court police sources said as per the rules a regular prisoner’s van is meant for only 26 people, including the security guards and the driver. However, 40 to 50 UTPs are crammed into a van, they added.
The sources said the number of personnel should be increased at least up to 1,000 and more vehicles be provided so that the UTPs could be produced in a smooth manner before the courts.
Police sources said the court police comprised the personnel who are transferred from the five police districts. However, the district police never depute the required number of personnel.
They said there were two companies — A and B — for bringing the UTP to the courts from the jails. The ‘A’ company consists of only 108 personnel from districts Central and West, though its sanctioned strength was 230. The ‘B’ company’s sanctioned strength of personnel from districts South, East and Malir is over 430, but only 210 personnel were deputed from these districts, they said.
In addition, the sources said, the court police were also being used by the range police for additional duties, such as deployment during law and order situations or protocol for the VVIPs. “How could the production of the UTPs in the courts be a priority for the court police as long as they are under the administrative control of the police department,” they said.
The lawyers dealing with the cases in the lower courts alleged that their clients were not being produced by the authorities, who had adopted a “discriminatory” policy as the UTPs being tried in special courts were on their top priority.
They said the production rate of the UTPs in the anti-terrorism courts, accountability courts, banking courts, anti-corruption courts, customs court and anti-narcotics court was much higher than that of the ordinary courts.
