Sindh High Court reprimands police over killings of alleged criminals in ‘suspicious encounters’
KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) has expressed serious resentment over the police for killing a suspect in a suspicious encounter and said that if police were allowed to continue with such actions, the very purpose of the courts would be undermined and public confidence in the judicial system would be eroded.
The SHC also noted that the police, being a responsible force, were required to exercise reasonable restraint and discipline, as they were saddled with a responsibility rather than a sacred duty to the prosecution of offenders, and were expected to discharge that duty in accordance with law.
A two-judge constitutional bench of the SHC, headed by Justice Mohammad Saleem Jessar, further observed that the suspect in question was said to be a proclaimed offender with a heavy criminal record, yet such stigma against an alleged offender will not grant an open license to the police to kill him in such a manner.
It ruled that custodial killings are tantamount to perturbing the judicial system and cannot be allowed to continue.
Bench observes such inicdents undermine very purpose of courts; directs FIA to investigate killing of a man by police within a month
The bench directed the senior police officers to refer the matter to the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) for investigation and asked the FIA to probe it strictly in accordance with law and complete the investigation within a month.
The bench made these observations while disposing of a petition seeking a directive for the recovery of petitioner Rani Khatoon’s brother, Shahmeer, who was allegedly taken away by unknown persons from her house in a Malir locality in the wee hours of the night between Jan 14 and 15.
Citing the Home Department, provincial police officer and others as respondents, Ms Khatoon submitted that the detainee was picked up within the premises of Sachal police station. She petitioned the SHC on Jan 15 after approaching the police officers concerned and sought her brother’s whereabouts.
Sachal SHO in his reply contended that the alleged missing person was killed in a police encounter that took place between unknown suspects and a police party of Shah Latif police station on Jan 17 and a case (FIR No.97 of 2026) was registered under Section 353 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty), 324 (attempted murder) and 34 (common intention) of Pakistan Penal Code.
However, the counsel for the petitioner argued that the detainee was killed in a staged encounter on Jan 17 after he was taken away by police from his home on Jan 15. He also contended that it was a case of illegal confinement and custodial killing which required a proper investigation.
An Additional Advocate General (AAG) submitted that the brother of the petitioner was a habitual offender and involved in more than ten cases registered at different police stations in the province.
The AAG also contended that the petitioner had managed this petition to save the proclaimed offender from the due process of law. He said the encounter was genuine and the matter was investigated by the police while an investigation report has also been filed before the court concerned.
The bench in its order said that a series of facts in the petition prima facie substantiated the stance of the petitioner that the police encounter was suspicious and though no specific allegation has been levelled against any particular person about abduction, it sufficiently lends support to the petitioner’s stance that the police encounter was staged to do away with the life of the suspect killed.
It also noted that torture, inhuman conduct, cruelty and degrading treatment have been recognised as an offence and being party to the 1984 UN Convention, Pakistan had resolved to curb torture and inhuman conduct while the Parliament had enacted the Torture and Custodial Death (Prevention and Punishment) Act, 2022.
Under this law, the bench further said that the investigation of an offence about custodial death and torture was entrusted to the FIA and purpose/intent of such legislation to assign investigation to FIA was to provide a neutral venue to probe into these matters which did often related to local police and it was observed by the courts time and again that police officers undertaking investigation extended undue favour to their colleagues which resulted into weak prosecution.
“Sufficient material was available on record to say that deceased Shahmeer brother of the petitioner was killed in an encounter, which appears to be suspicious. We have been informed that FIR No.97 of 2026 was investigated and for want of deficient evidence was proposed to be disposed of under A class as names of the alleged other accomplices of deceased Shahmeer could not be traced out”, it added.
The bench in its order also observed that the SSP Malir and SHO Sachal, despite being put on notice in this petition and being aware of facts of the case, have failed to take further steps in the matter including an independent inquiry into the applications moved by the petitioner.
It said, “No matter a person is involved in many cases, he is proclaimed offender with a mammoth criminal record, the stigma against the alleged offender will not grant open license to the police to kill him in the manner, as has happened in the instant case. If the police officials are allowed to continue with such actions then purpose of establishment of the courts of law would become fruitless and public confidence in the judicial system would erode. The police being responsible force is required to observe a reasonable restraint and discipline”.
“Police are saddled with a responsibility rather sacred duty to prosecution of the offenders and as such are expected to discharge this duty in accordance with law. In the line of duty, police should refer the offenders accused of any offence for trial before competent court of law. Custodial killings tantamount to perturb the judicial system and cannot be allowed to perpetuate”, it added.
While deposing of the petition, the bench directed the SSP Malir and other officials concerned to transfer the investigation of the case in question to the director FIA, who must depute an officer to investigate the FIR in terms of Sections 5, 7 and 13 of the Act 2022 strictly in accordance with law and complete the investigation within the stipulated statutory period of 30 days.
It also ordered the investigating officer to record the statement of the petitioner and other witnesses conversant with the facts of the case. Upon conclusion of the investigation, the result must be transmitted to the court concerned.
Published in Dawn, April 5th, 2026
