A police officer who had dared to initiate legal action against a retired army general on the directives of a court is now in hot waters for all the wrong reasons.
The case in question implicated former deputy director Inter-Services Intelligence Maj-Gen (retired) Nusrat Naeem, who in 2010 had entered into a Rs130 million deal with a mill owner in Hattar.
Later, a cheque worth Rs73 million issued by the retired general had been dishonoured.
Since then the mill owner had tried to get a case registered with the Industrial Area police, but to no avail. Finally, a district and sessions court had intervened in the matter and directed the police to register the case.
Insiders allege that soon after, on December 3, Superintendent Police (SP) Dr Khurrum Rasheed was removed from the post of SP Industrial Area by the interior minister under the influence of the ISI and in violation of rules the police officer was asked to surrender before the establishment division.
When the law and order situation in the Industrial Area deteriorated due to protests against blasphemy, the SP was asked to work on his post till further orders due to non-availability of officers.
Then after a month on January 6, Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry took suo motu notice of the controversial removal of three officers, including SP Rasheed, but was told by the establishment division that the SP had been transferred as he had completed his three-year tenure in the capital city.
On January 8, the SC accepted the reason of the transfer and the SP was shifted to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
“A number of rules were overlooked. The transfer and posting of grade 17 to 19 police officers is made on the orders of the chief commissioner of Islamabad and the officers only surrender to the establishment division on the request of the inspector general of police,” a PSP officer told Dawn.
He added: “Secondly, SP Dr Khursheed’s tenure had not been calculated correctly. The SP went abroad in 2011 for higher studies and returned in 2012. He only served in the capital for two years. Since he was not in the country, the period is not counted in his serving tenure at operations division of capital police.”
He alleged that the establishment division included the year in the tenure of three years and furnished wrong details in front of the apex court, and the SP was removed from his post in the Industrial Area.
“It is quite ironic that the establishment division has not tracked tenures at other police stations. A grade 20 officer has served in the capital police for the last four years, and a grade 19 officer for the last nine years. There are four more grade 19 officers who completed six, five and four year long tenures. How come the establishment division did not transfer them?” he questioned.
Another senior officer seconded him and alleged that SP Rasheed had only been transferred as he registered a case against the senior army officer.
“He was guilty for implementing the court orders and had booked the retired major general of the army, who also served in the ISI,” the officer added.
He said that if the court did not right this wrong, then this will serve as a poor precedent for other cases and police officers will have to rethink many times before taking rightful action against an influential.