HYDERABAD: The Sindh High Court has restrained the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) from taking action against its investigating officer, Zubair Yousfani, in the light of a directive issued by a special judge of anti-corruption on Dec 15 in a human trafficking case.

A division bench of Sindh High Court, Hyderabad circuit, comprising Justice Adnan ul Karim Memon and Justice Riazat Ali Sahar has fixed the matter for Jan 15 and issued notices to the deputy attorney general and respondents.

The bench passed the order on Wednesday on a petition filed by IO Yousfani through Advocate Amanullah.

The Special Judge of Anti-Corruption (Central) in his court diary dated Dec 15 had ordered that a letter be written to the FIA director general against IO Yousfani for conducting unfair investigation into the human trafficking case against Qaiser Iqbal. The judge was hearing a bail application of the accused.

The petitioner prayed before the high court that the Dec 15 order of the judge be set aside.

He stated that he was the IO of the human trafficking case registered under an FIR (No 25/2025) registered under Section 3 of the Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act, 2018 (Amendment 2025). The case was registered after an inquiry on the complaint lodged by Ms Zinesh Masseh.

The complainant had alleged that her sister, Ms Neha, daughter of Shareef Masih, was lured by Qaiser Iqbal, who allegedly provided fake educational documents, arranged visas and trafficked her to China, where she was allegedly married to a Chinese national, drugged and also subjected to rape in lieu of monetary consideration received by the accused.

Petitioner said that her application was converted to inquiry and an FIR was registered.

On Aug 5, 2025, her statement was recorded under Section 161 Cr.PC which corroborated the version contained in the FIR. He said owing to medical reasons, her statement under Section 164 Cr.PC could not be recorded.

The petitioner said that on Oct 22, he moved application before a trial court for recording of her statement under Section 164 Cr.PC read with Rule 34 of Trafficking in Persons Rules, 2020, demonstrating diligence and procedural compliance.

On Dec 1,2025 the victim’s 164 Cr.PC statement was recorded by a magistrate where she retracted her statements and adopted a different version. Qaiser Iqbal moved bail applications, which were opposed by the complainant and the victim appeared through her counsel to object to the bail. Her presence and contention was noted down by Special Court Anti-Corruption (Special) Hyderabad.

He said he sent a video statement of the victim received to the complainant through WhatsApp for forensic analysis and not only this but the petitioner being I/O recorded a video statement of the victim, who was supporting her case at initial stage. Later, the accused preferred bail plea before trial court where the victim submitted a no-objection affidavit.

He said during pendency of bail plea, the trial court in its Dec 15 order issued directives to DG FIA against petitioner on ground of unfair investigation. He said the trial court judge went beyond judicial propriety and issued a formal letter captioned, “complaint against IO Zubair Akber Yousfani, assistant director FIA crime circle, Hyderabad, for misconduct and deliberate lapses in investigation” and added that the judge directed that departmental proceedings be initiated forthwith and progress be reported to court.

The petitioner said he was neither issued a show-cause notice nor afforded opportunity of hearing before passing such stricture. He said the judge had no jurisdiction in a bail application under Cr.PC, FIA Act or any other law to direct initiation of departmental proceedings against IO or issue a complaint to DG FIA.

He said as a matter of fact there were no lapses or act on his part for unfair investigation, rather he arrested the accused at Islamabad Airport. He said he collected evidence and recorded statements. He said the accused’s bail was rejected by the trial court.

He said the alleged victim initially avoided her 164 Cr.PC statement at the pretext of ill-health and in case of retraction of version by victim IO could not be held responsible for act of any person. He said ordering departmental proceedings falls exclusively within the domain of departmental authority, and judicial interference at a bail stage amounts to encroachment upon executive functions.

Published in Dawn, December 28th, 2025