HYDERABAD: A division bench of the Sindh High Court’s Hyderabad circuit on Monday directed the inspector general of police to file a report mentioning details of missing persons or the bodies found within the last two years.

The bench comprising Justice Salahuddin Panhwar and Justice Fahim Ahmed Siddiqui passed the order while hearing a constitutional petition of a man whose father was allegedly picked up by a joint team of police and CIA along with five other persons on June 16, 2014.

Maazullah’s son Hassan Shah had filed a constitutional petition through advocate Aslam Pervez seeking recovery of his father. According to him, plainclothes personnel from the Hatri police station under the supervision of the official in-charge of CIA in Hyderabad, Aslam Langha, had picked up his father as well as five other persons on June 16, 2014. He stated that three of the detained persons were let off and another two were freed 45 days later but his father was unaccounted for since being picked up.

He said police did not disclose his whereabouts. He said he and his relatives filed an application with the police but in vain. He further stated that his father was carrying a mobile phone when he was picked up, adding that some unknown person had attended the calls made by their relatives on this number.

In an earlier hearing, the court had constituted a joint investigation team (JIT). On Monday, the JIT submitted its report through Additional Advocate General Allah Bachayo Soomro. However, the bench expressed its dissatisfaction over the report and directed the Hyderabad SSP, who prepared the report, to appear in person and submit complete details regarding the mobile number of the missing person, proceedings of the geo-fencing and efforts taken by the police as these were not attached with the JIT report.

JIT’s findings

The seven-member JIT in its report excluded factors of kidnapping for ransom, kidnapping due to personal enmity and enforced disappearance. It held three sessions — on March 21, May 18 and June 6, 2017 — and concluded that the person had “gone missing on his own”. It stated that there was no eyewitness or any incriminating clue pointing towards the offence of abduction or enforced disappearance.

It is not evident that the missing person had affiliation with any political, ethnic or religious group, it said.

It further stated that the complainant/relatives did not level allegations against any particular person for abduction. Therefore, culprits remained unknown in this case. Almost three years have passed since he had gone missing but no call for ransom was made. No enmity factor in any manner had surfaced to establish that Maazullah was abducted.

The petitioner replied in the affirmative when the JIT asked him if he had approached the police concerned for the registration of an FIR. He was advised to get the case registered against those who raided his house and took away persons from his family, according to the report.

The JIT directed the SHO concerned to get a missing advertisement published in newspapers and also use the electronic media besides making every possible effort to find a clue to Maazullah by checking with intelligence agencies, prisons and acquaintances etc.

After going through the report, the court observed that “every opinion of an investigation team must always base on some cogent reasons and mere conclusion that ‘missing person went their own’ prima facie will not equate with reasons”.

Published in Dawn, August 23rd, 2017