The IHC’s Justice Riaz Ahmad Khan disposed of the petition seeking the recovery of Muhammad Arif after the additional attorney general informed the court that the matter had been referred to the Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances.
The IHC bench, however, expressed its displeasure over the ISI’s attitude towards the court.The same IHC bench on the last date of hearing on March 24 had directed the DG ISI to appear before the court in person. The DG ISI, however, submitted an affidavit intimating the court that Muhammad Arif was not in the ISI’s custody.
The court, while expressing its annoyance over the spy agency that was seeking six-week adjournment into the matter, observed, “It was not our desire to summon the DG ISI but the conduct of the dealing official was tantamount to making amockery of the court. A person files a petition for the recovery of his relative and the dealing official, instead of submitting a report, suggests to the court for adjourning the proceedings for six weeks. It was an insult to the judiciary.”
Colonel Fayyaz, Deputy Director Legal of the ISI, tendered an apology before the court in response to the court’s observations.Muhammad Arif, a former activist of Jamaat-i-Islami (JI), was running a printing press and private schools in Rawalpindi. Parveen Bibi, the wife of Muhammad Arif, a resident of Peshawar Road, Rawalpindi, registered an FIR and later filed a petition for the recovery of her husband in February this year.
The petitioner had told the court that on December 17, 2013 her husband along with the General Secretary of Pakistan Railways, Mazdoor Union, Ishtiaq Ahmed Aasi, Dr Azizul Hassan and Hafiz Abdul Rauf was going to Khushab when all the four were allegedly picked up by the spy agency.
An FIR was registered in the Mitha Tiwana police of district Khushab. After the four persons had gone missing on December 17, two weeks later, two of them, Ishtiaq Aasi and Dr Azizul Hassan, returned to their homes while Hafiz Abdul Rauf and Muhammad Arif are still missing.
An additional attorney general, however, informed the court that an application for the recovery of Muhammad Arif had been filed with the missing person commission, which was the relevant forum.
The legal counsel for the petitioner, Zafarul Hassan Joya, argued before the court that the commission for the recovery of missing persons would take years to decide the case of his client. He requested the court to pass directions to the commission for an expeditious disposal of the case.
Justice Khan remarked that the commission was being headed by a former judge of the Supreme Court, therefore, instead of passing directions he could request the commission for an early disposal of the matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment