ISLAMABAD: A woman from Quetta on Wednesday approached the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC), challenging the police’s refusal to register an FIR into the alleged abduction of her parents, who have been missing since September 2025.

Through her counsel, Umer Ijaz Gilani, Bibi Shukria of Quetta challenged the Dec 16, 2025 order of the Balochistan High Court (BHC), which upheld the police’s refusal to register the FIR by rejecting her plea.

The dispute stems from a family rivalry following the death of Haji Bari Dad in July 2024. The petitioner’s sister was his second wife. Bari Dad’s son from his first wife, Naimatullah Agha, a senior government official, was accused of orchestrating a series of retaliatory actions against Shukria’s family.

In 2024, Shukria’s widowed sister and her children were allegedly confined and tortured by Naimatullah Agha.

Petitioner says police refused to find whereabouts of her parents, yet BHC rejected her plea

The petitioner contended that she had been deprived of her fundamental right to have a cognisable offence investigated, stating that Naimatullah and his companions had allegedly abducted her parents, but the local police refused to register the case.

The petition claimed that the police were simply refusing to investigate the allegations or make any effort whatsoever to recover her missing parents.

According to the petition, her parents, Shah Zaman and Bakht Nama, have been missing since Sept 16, 2025, and by refusing to register an FIR and investigate the matter, the state has failed to fulfill its obligation to probe the alleged disappearance.

The petition pleaded that in seeking the realisation of her basic right to have the abduction of her parents investigated, she had approached multiple forums.

Having exhausted all available legal remedies, she had now moved the FCC as the last forum for the enforcement of her rights as well as those of her abducted parents.

It was pleaded that law enforcement personnel allegedly acting at the behest of the senior official conducted raids on four houses belonging to the petitioner’s family, abducted family members and sealed their houses.

The official allegedly used his influence to have the family’s CNICs blocked and subsequently had the entire family illegally deported to Afghanistan. However, it added, Afghan authorities verified their Pakistani nationality and sent them back to Pakistan.

Against this alleged illegal operation and arbitrary exercise of power, the petitioner filed an application for the registration of an FIR, which was not entertained.

She then filed a petition under Section 22-A of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which was also dismissed.

Subsequently, the petitioner’s husband, Farid Ahmed, was allegedly abducted on Sept 1, 2025 and went missing.

She filed a habeas corpus petition, and although the concerned court issued a production order, it later disposed of the case.

The petitioner then filed another petition under Section 22-A of the CrPC for the registration of an FIR against Naimatullah in connection with the alleged abduction of her husband from their house on Qamrani Road, Quetta.

The Justice of Peace, after hearing the parties, allowed the petition and directed the SHO, Industrial Area, to receive the application and proceed in accordance with law by registering the FIR against the alleged individuals.

The petition argued that the BHC had based its order on considerations that were totally irrelevant, adding that the only relevant consideration for the registration of an FIR was whether the application disclosed the commission of a cognisable offence.

Once such an allegation is made, the registration of an FIR becomes mandatory, while questions relating to the veracity of the allegations are to be examined at a later stage.

It further argued that the existence of a civil dispute within a family did not deprive citizens of their right to seek investigation by state authorities into a cognisable offence. If such reasoning were accepted, most FIRs ever registered in the country would be rendered illegal.

The petition maintained that the high court’s ruling set a dangerous precedent, would render the criminal justice system inaccessible, and would create impunity for powerful offenders.

Published in Dawn, January 22nd, 2026