HYDERABAD: Additional District Judge-VII Naveed Ahmed Soomro on Tuesday ordered formation of an investigation team comprising two police officers — not below the rank of Additional SP — from any district other than Hyderabad but the same division to conduct a thorough investigation into the FIR pertaining to alleged custodial killing against several senior police officers.

He ordered that the proposed team should consider all aspects of this case, especially the version advanced by the applicant.

The applicant, Ms Reshma, has alleged that her brother, Farhan Siyal, was kidnapped and shot dead by officers of police and CIA after receiving a huge amount in ransom. According to the court order, all parties shall have the right to produce evidence in support of their claim and the team shall be at liberty to call for verification of all sorts, including weapons, bank accounts, mobile phones, cause of death [ascertained through] exhumation of the body [of Farhan Siyal].

The entire exercise should be completed “within earliest time” and such report should be submitted before magistrate with copy to this court on or before May 10, the order read.

Woman’s version of brother’s ‘kidnap and murder by police officers’ incorporated in order

The judge said that if such investigation was not completed, then appropriate extension of time could be sought by the probe team from the magistrate concerned upon showing valid reasons.

Ms Reshma has prayed for the registration of a murder FIR against Hyderabd SSP Amjad Shaikh, Khairpur Mirs SSP Rohil Khoso, Hyderabad CIA in-charge Muneer Abbasi, Khairpur Mirs CIA in-charge Hanif Khoso, SHO Phlelli (Hyderabad) Ayaz Bughio and several other police personnel. The police had described Siyal’s death as the outcome of an encounter on March 28 claiming that he was a criminal wanted by police in many cases registered against him.

Advocate Raja Jawad Ahmed is representing the applicant.

The court has framed four points while deciding her application, filed under Sections 22-A and B CrPC. One of the points is that nobody is above the law and everyone has to be dealt with in accordance with law irrespective of his/her rank, caste and position.

The second point is that “a pious man could also commit a sin and likewise a sinful soul may also do a good deed”; the third point is that “courts are custodians and they have to impart justice and unearth real facts since it is the job of court to find true facts rather than become a party”.

The fourth point is: “Even if a person committed 99 murders, he cannot be deemed murderer when allegation of another murder is raised against him and he shall be dealt with in accordance with law and not otherwise”.

Applicant’s version narrated

The court in its order narrated the applicant’s version about the alleged abduction and killing of Farhan Siyal in a fake encounter. It also incorporated the claim as mentioned by the applicant regarding payment of Rs10m as ransom through a bank account of ‘A Karim Enterprise’ in Ghotki. The amount was transferred by one, Deedar Ahmed, on March 21. The applicant claimed that the police were demanding another Rs2m for Siyal’s release. According to the applicant, said the court’s order, on March 28 Farhan Siyal was killed in front of the applicant and her other family members.

The court said that in view of seriousness of the matter, court had called report from the Hyderabad DIG instead of calling a report from the SP of Hyderabad complaint cell. The DIG, however, submitted a report stating that Farhan Siyal was involved in seven FIRs and he (the DIG) did not submit any report regarding allegations levelled by the applicant.

Apart from that, the accused persons also submitted their replies.

Lawyer Ashfaq Khaskheli represented the Hyderabad CIA in-charge Muneer Abbasi and lawyer Faisal Raza appeared for Phulelli SHO Ayaz Bughio.

Contentions of applicant’s lawyer

The applicant’s counsel submitted in court that the deceased sustained bullet injuries on his chest whereas the post-mortem report revealed that injuries were found on his back and there appeared no bullet exist wound on his back. This shows not only mala fide of police but as well mala fide of the MLO, who had prepared a false report, according to the lawyer.

He called for the registration of a second FIR.

The court noted that the point of registration of multiple FIRs was settled by Supreme Court in Ms Sughran Bibi case of 2018. It said: “No doubt the principle of Sughran Bibi case had placed huge burden on the shoulders of investigation officer since he had to investigate different versions put forward to him about a same incident.

The court observed that the FIR of police encounter, in which Farhan Siyal was shown killed, was cancelled in C-class but in court’s opinion, the same could not be disposed of under C-class as absconders, besides Farhan Siyal, were also involved.

The judge said that the SC had long ago recognised interest of the police officials in investigation against their fellows.

“As far as powers of Justice of Peace are concerned the jurisdiction is quite clear that such investigation can only be directed to any other police officer and not otherwise,” he added.

The court recalled that the SC had observed in its judgement that in case of police encounter, there was need for amendment so that such police encounters should be investigated by independent agencies and not by the police themselves.

Published in Dawn, April 19th, 2023