Court orders FIR against East DC, former SHO over land grabbing

A district and sessions court has ordered the registration of an FIR against the deputy commissioner of District East and a former station house officer of the Gulistan-e-Johar police station among other government officials for colluding with an alleged land grabber to illegally occupy a plot.

The additional district and sessions judge (East I) ordered police to book Deputy Commissioner Muhammad Ali Shah, Additional DC-II Younis Dahri, Mukhtiarkar Wazir Chand Oad, Sub-Inspector Haji Iqbal and private person Riffat Zaman Kiyani under Section 3 of the Illegal Dispossession Act.

The judge, Haleem Ahmed, ordered bailable warrants of Rs100,000 against the accused and directed the deputy inspector general of District East to appoint an officer not below the rank of superintendent of police, who would submit a compliance report in the court on July 12.

Tufail Ahmed had filed a complaint in the court, stating that the accused had illegally occupied his plot admeasuring 400 square yards in Architect Engineering Cooperative Housing Society in Block 8 of Gulistan-e-Johar by demolishing its boundary walls.

According to the inquiry report prepared by a judicial magistrate on the court orders, the accused forcibly entered the property, maltreated and misbehaved with the complainant and his family and dispossessed them of it on January 6.

It added that after demolishing the structure, the accused then erected a boundary wall over an area of three acres, which included the plot and handed over its possession to Kiyani, who had a reputation of defrauding people over fake property files.

The report said that when inquired about the incident, Iqbal, who was then SHO of the area, lied that the structure was demolished by the Anti-Encroachment Cell because the plot was being illegally used for the purpose of a marriage hall. On the other hand, the director of the AEC denied that any such operation was conducted by him or his team.

The report added that the DC Shah did not properly answered the question put to him by the inquiry team but “smartly skipped” the interrogation and merely submitted that there was an entry in the record of rights in the name of the society but no layout plan was mentioned in it.

The original document of the property filed by the complainant was verified from the Incharge Microfilming Unit at the Board of Revenue, which showed the plot was genuinely registered in his name.

The judge in his order observed that prime facie, the version of the complainant was corroborated by three witnesses and documentary evidence. Speaking of the pretext of anti-encroachment drive, he added that the question of encroachment did not arise because neither the property belonged to the government nor the complainant was illegally occupying it.

“The complainant was having a valid lease of the property over which he had constructed a structure for living, but the same was demolished and handed over to a man wholly unconcerned, namely Kiyani, by the co-accused in a ruthless and brazen manner,” read the order. It said that it was evident that the complainant was lawful owner of the land and illegally dispossessed by the accused with intent to grab the property.