close
Advertisement
Can't connect right now! retry

add The News to homescreen

tap to bring up your browser menu and select 'Add to homescreen' to pin the The News web app

Got it!

add The News to homescreen

tap to bring up your browser menu and select 'Add to homescreen' to pin the The News web app

Got it!
December 5, 2020

How complaints are complicated by police!

Lahore

December 5, 2020

LAHORE:A recent incident shows how the police use delaying tactics in the provision of justice to the common man and complicate cases instead of solving them through available evidence.

The Mozang police registered a firing case against Amir and his accomplices on the complaint of Arshaman on July 31. On August 1, accused Amir lodged a complaint against complainant Arshaman, his uncle and cousins on charges of cutting his wires and a case was registered after one month and 25 days on September 25. The investigation of both cases was transferred to Mozang Investigation Wing in-charge Ikram. Arshaman and Amir provided CCTV footages to the investigating officer, in which Amir was present but Arshaman was missing. Arshaman filed an application to the SP Investigation Civil Lines so that the accused involved in the firing could be arrested. The SP summoned Arshaman and the accused party to his office on November 30.

The investigating officer informed the SP that he had CCTV footages of both incidents. However, the SP did not bother to watch the footages and directed the IO to take Arshaman and Amir to another room and play the footages before them. The videos were played and Arshaman was not found in them but Amir was found present at the crime scene. However, the IO allegedly misled the SP and told him that Arshaman was also present in the video. However, Arshaman informed the SP that he was not present in the video. The SP again did not bother to watch the CCTV footages himself to verify the claims of Arshaman, Amir and IO Ikram and kicked them out of his office, suggesting that the police should have arrested both shooters and the complainant under Section 107/151. The SP neither admonished IO Ikram for not arresting the shooters captured in the video, firing shots at the place of Arshaman, nor issued any direction for the arrest of the accused, who are still at large. When contacted, IO Ikram said complainant Arshaman and accused Amir had not given names and addresses of the shooters. He said accused Amir was on interim bail and he would identify the shooters after cancellation of his bail. He said he had found both parties guilty and the accused could be identified through the CCTV footages.

When contacted, Civil Lines SP Investigation Shamasul Haq said that he would verify whether Arshaman was in the video or not, adding that the persons involved in the wire cutting incident would be arrested even if they were not captured by the CCTV footage. He said the investigation would be conducted on merit and Arshaman should present evidence to prove his innocence.