KP police warehouses: SC seeks complete report on all case-property vehicles

PESHAWAR: A three-member bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan on Thursday asked the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa advocate general to submit a detailed report on the vehicles held as case property in all police stations of the province and their current status.

The SC bench comprising Justice Musarrat Hilali, Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim and Justice Shakil Ahmad was hearing an appeal filed by Muhammad Imran and others at the Peshawar Registry.

KP Advocate General (AG) Shah Faisal Utmankhel and police officers appeared in the court.

During the hearing, Justice Musarrat Hilali asked the AG to inform the court about the report submitted and the number of vehicles currently parked in police warehouses.

The AG informed the court that 1,119 vehicles were parked at the Daudzai Police Station warehouse, while 36 vehicles were temporarily parked at the warehouse of Mathra Police Station.

Justice Musarrat Hilali remarked that the vehicle summoned the previous day had been in use by a retired police officer for the past five years, was in working condition, and had no entry in the official record. She questioned why it had not been kept in the warehouse.

Justice Shakil Ahmad said that if this was the situation, the court would issue a contempt notice to the relevant police officer and pass an order to ensure that no case property vehicle was used in the future.

Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim remarked that the police appeared to be running a personal kingdom where they used to give vehicles to whoever they wished. He emphasized that this was not above the law and would not be tolerated under any circumstances.

The AG said that due to limited time, he did not have the complete status of each vehicle. However, overall, these vehicles were currently parked in police warehouses. Justice Musarrat Hilali then asked whether this was documented and if the vehicles were indeed still parked there.

The AG affirmed that they were, but added that it would take more time to determine which vehicles belonged to which police stations and to which cases they were related.

Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim inquired whether the provincial government had established any rules under the new narcotics law to auction these vehicles and deposit the proceeds in the government treasury, with compensation to be paid to the accused if a verdict was given in their favour.

The AG responded that no such law or rules had been formulated yet. To this, Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim questioned why this matter hadn’t been considered.

The AG informed the court that a comprehensive report covering all police stations would soon be submitted. In response, the court directed him to present the report in a way that identifies which vehicle belonged to which police station and its current status, as thousands of vehicles were rusting into scrap and now resemble junkyards.

It was noted that some vehicles had even been stacked on top of each other, destroying their market value. The AG assured the court that every effort was being made to provide all the necessary information as requested.

Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim remarked that the Inspector General of Police (IGP) was considered the station house officer for the entire province, both in practice and under the law. “If the situation is not rectified, the court would issue a notice to the IGP,” he added.

Justice Shakil Ahmad observed that the court was not aware of who was using which vehicle, but warned that if such issues arise again, the concerned District Police Officers, Deputy Inspectors General and SHOs would be held accountable.

The AG said that meetings had been held with all relevant officials, making it clear that the SC’s orders must be followed precisely. He emphasized that the unauthorized use of case property vehicles would not be tolerated and that, according to the law, these vehicles must be parked in official warehouses.

Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim suggested that such vehicles be submitted to the Excise Department’s warehouse, as the court had personally inspected one of the vehicles and found it to be in working condition. He warned that if things continued as they were, all vehicles would end up being found operational and misused. He also noted that valuable parts were being removed from the vehicles.

The court asked the AG to submit a detailed report on all case property vehicles in the province’s police stations and warned that any errors in the report could result in action against the responsible officials.

The judges admonished the AG, saying, “All of this is happening right under your nose, and you claim to be unaware? Open your eyes and activate your officers. This is not your responsibility alone; it’s the entire Advocate General’s Office’s duty to monitor such matters. You are the Principal Law Officer of this province.” The court then adjourned the hearing until July.