HYDERABAD, May 8: The Hyderabad circuit bench of the Sindh High Court on Tuesday dismissed two separate applications for bail of four Mirpurkhas policemen who faced charges of subjecting a man to torture.

The accused SHO of Satellite Town police station, Abid Kaimkhani, ASI Ameen, constables Mohammad Yousuf, Zulfikar and Rehmatullah were booked under sections 365, 343, 34 PPC on the compliant of one Naeem, a poultry trader.

The FIR said that the policemen in a mobile picked up the man on March 25 near his home. The mobile driver Yousuf deprived him of Rs42,980, a gold ring, a wrist watch and a cell- phone.

The policemen locked him up at the Satellite Town police station before the SHO took him in a mobile to Jarwari pump where he was again put in a lock-up and left there for the night.

The following day at 4 pm ASI Amir Mari, police constables Zulfikar, Rehmatullah and Baloch took him to a quarter behind the Town police station where he remained in detention for three days, the FIR said.

There the SHO of Satellite Town police station Abid Kaimkhani and ASI Amin forced him to confess to robbery of one Ramesh Kumar. When he refused ASI Amin, Rehmatullah and Baloch tortured him and burnt him with cigarettes burns and beat him with rifle butts.

He said that the police kept him at different places. He said he recalled meeting another person Hashim Jarwar during his confinement who was now being treated in a hospital after getting released on April 2.

The applicants said that they had approached the high court for securing bail but it was rejected on Nov 11, 2006. On Feb 6 the prosecution examined a material witnesses i.e. complainant and on Feb 16 they filed the second bail application before trial court which was also rejected.

They insisted that they were innocent and had falsely been implicated in the case. As far as allegations were concerned there was no ground for refusal of bail, they said.

The complainant’s statements and cross examination clearly reflected that there was no direct evidence available against them, they said and added that the complainant was not only retracting his earlier statements but was also making false statements under oath.

They argued that they had been languishing in jail for more than seven months. The FIR did not charge them with abduction hence there was no case under sections 365 PPC. The section though was deleted on Feb 22 after a supplementary report was submitted by DIG operations, they said.