KARACHI, Nov 7: Another anti-terrorism court has asked the authorities to take action against police officials who implicated an innocent citizen in a false case of spreading sectarian hatred.

Acquitting a 24-year-old man in a case, fabricated by the Crime Investigation Department of the Sindh police, Judge Khan Pervez Chang desired on Thursday the provincial police chief and the home secretary to take action against ASI Altaf Hussain (complainant), SI Muneer Ahmed Abbasi (investigation officer) and Abdul Hafeez Junejo (then SHO, now promoted to DSP) for involving “the innocent citizen in a false case after filing of petition No 1604/ 2002 in the Sindh High Court by the mother of the accused.”

Mohammed Vakeel, who worked as an airconditioning technician in a private firm in SITE, was taken into custody on Aug 29 by police when he was returning to his Orangi Town residence in the company’s van along with other colleagues. Police, however, showed his arrest officially after 23 days - on Sept 20.

The next day his mother, Rabia Bano, faxed applications to the chief justice of the Sindh High Court and the Sindh home secretary against his illegal detention. Then on Sept 12 the woman moved a constitutional petition challenging her son’s illegal detention.

Initially police effected his arrest on Sept 20 in a case pertaining to possession of an unlicensed weapon under section 13-D of the Arms Ordinance.

Later, on Sept 24 the detainee was booked in the false case under section 8 (d) of the Anti-terrorist Act.

According to complainant ASI Altaf Hussain, during interrogation, Vakeel disclosed that he was in possession of two dozen magazines (Inteqam-i- Haq, a video cassette (Taliban Ki Larai) and other literature for inciting people to Jihad against foreign countries and Pakistan. It was claimed that a raiding party seized the objectionable material in Vakeel’s residence on a lead given by him.

ASI Muneer Ahmed Abbasi conducted the investigation and handed the case papers to SHO Abdul Hafeez Junejo, who prepared the chargesheet and submitted it before the administrative judge of the ATCs on Oct 14.

The judge, in his eight-page judgment, also referred to certain contradictions in the depositions of the three police officials as prosecution witnesses.

The judge wrote: “Complainant ASI Altaf Hussain in his testimony has stated that he is 8th class pass and the mashirnama [memo] Ex. 5-A was written by HC Shameem, on his dictation and he is unable to read the mashirnama. On the other hand mashir SI Ali Murad and IO SI Muneer Ahmed have stated on oath that mashirnama Ex. 5-A was written by complainant ASI Altaf Hussain in their presence at the spot.”

The judge also referred to the statements of the three police officials to the effect that the recovered video was a play and seen on TV and VCP, which were available in the room along with the seized objectional material. “The question arises as to what prevented the complainant and the investigation officer who did not recover the TV and the VCP, which was the important piece of evidence,” the judge observed.

The judge referred to the production of the copy of the constitutional petition moved in the SHC on Sept 12, and observed: “Therefore inference can be drawn that after having the knowledge of filing the petition, the accused has been falsely implicated in 13 (d) case and in this case.”

The judge also observed: “It is necessary to mention here that SI Muneer Ahmed Abassi after completing the investigation handed over the case papers to SHO Abdul Hafeez Junejo, who prepared the chargesheet and submitted the same before the administrative judge. The name of the SHO was deliberately not mentioned in the list of prosecution witnesses as he avoided to appear and get himself examined in this case, may be due to pendency of petition filed by the mother of the accused in the honourable high court.”

The judge further wrote: “The conduct of the SHO and other police officials shows that they have falsely implicated the accused in criminal cases in order to protect them from legal action for wrongfully confining the accused, because the mother of the accused had filed petition in the high court.”

In one of his concluding paragraphs, Judge Chang observed: “There is also no independent witness in this case, the aforesaid material contradictions in the testimonies of the complainant and other prosecution witnesses make the prosecution case highly doubtful.”

This was the second case under section 8 (d) of the ATA which has culminated in acquittal.

Earlier on Nov 4, police had a major blow when an anti-terrorism court acquitted five alleged workers of the banned Harkatul Mujahideen Al-Aalmi in a case pertaining to spreading sectarian hatred.

Judge Arshad Noor Khan of the ATC-2 had also issued notices to the investigation officer and the area SHO for implicating innocent people in the case.

The judge in his verdict also observed that “the police officers used innocent people as sacrificial animals to get shoulder promotions.”