THERE are certain practices prevalent in police stations across Hub city that are putting a question mark against the supposed impartiality of the criminal justice system. There are complaints that individuals involved in criminal cases are informally pressured to retain the services of specific legal practitioners.

In some instances, such persons are discouraged from choosing a counsel of their own choice, and are led to believe that non-compliance may result in less favourable treatment, whereas engage-ment of the suggested advocate may facilitate leniency during investigation or related proceedings.

Further, it has been observed that a limited number of advocates are repeatedly engaged across multiple first information reports (FIRs), giving rise to concerns regarding favouritism and the potential existence of some type of arrangement.

Additionally, complaints have been received that copies of FIRs are not promptly provided at police stations, particularly in cases where no arrest has been made, and that the transmission of FIRs to the relevant court is, at times, unnecessarily delayed.

If such complaints are, indeed, true, they undermine the right to a fair trial and due process as guaranteed under Article 10-A of the Constitution, and they erode public confidence in the adminis- tration of justice. It is imperative that an impartial inquiry is conducted into these allegations, and officials, if found involved, should be dealt with in accordance with the law.

Directions should also be issued to ensure the free choice of legal counsel, and compliance with legal procedures regarding the provision and transmission of FIRs. The relevant authorities should accord due seriousness to the critical issue and take necessary steps in the interest of fairness and the rule of law.

Muhammad Ibrahim Marri
Hub

Published in Dawn, June 3rd, 2026