Orangi house raid case: DSP gets bail after trader’s no objection

KARACHI: A sessions court on Tuesday granted post-arrest bail to Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) Umair Tariq Bajari in a case pertaining to the theft of Rs20 million and other valuables during a raid on the house of a trader in Orangi Town.

Bajari and over a dozen other policemen and civilians were booked last month on charges of robbery, abduction, house trespass and wrongful confinement after they allegedly looted trader Shakir Khan’s home in Orangi Town and briefly kidnapped him and his brother Amir Khan before releasing them near the Baloch Colony flyover.

The DSP and four civilians — Izhar, Sattar, Sohail and Mehfooz — are currently in judicial custody, while three accused have already obtained bail.

Through his lawyer Amir Mansoob Qureshi, Bajari submitted an application to the West additional district & session judge-II seeking post-arrest bail in the case. After hearing arguments from both sides, the judge granted bail to the accused against a surety of Rs100,000.

Complainant Shakir submitted an affidavit stating that he has no objection if the accused is released on bail. He said he had seen DSP Bajari neither inside nor outside his house on the day of the raid.

Separately, the counsel submitted West District Public Prosecutor (DPP) Shafique Ahmed Soomro’s scrutiny note on a charge sheet that pointed out “defects/discrepancies” for the investigating officer, DSP Naseem Kamal, to address before its submission to the relevant judicial magistrate.

According to the note, the DPP highlighted that the incident took place on November 19 but the FIR was lodged with a delay of two days on November 21 without any explanation.

He said the record shows that former District South SSP Imran Qureshi informed the West Zone DIG and the District West SSP about the information received by him from a federal agency and the constitution of a raiding party.

However, added the DPP, their statements were not recorded by the IO under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). “That entire idea and design of the raid was given by SSP Imran Qureshi who received information from the federal agency,” reads the note.

“His official Revo vehicle was used in the raid on his directions. As such he cannot be absolved from the liability. Therefore, the investigating officer is required to carefully examine this aspect of the case.

“The statement of SSP Imran Qureshi under Section 161 of the CrPC shows that the order of the raid and the informers/persons of the federal department/agency were given by him to DSP Umair after getting information by the federal department through phone, which shows that Umair has done his official duty and nothing more. Therefore, DSP Umair is not found liable for any offence.”

The DPP asked the IO to record the statement of “the informers/persons of the federal agency” who accompanied the raiding party to ensure fairness and impartiality.

“The investigating officer is also required to ask the complainant regarding his statement in which he clearly mentioned that he has received all his articles and does not intend to proceed further in this matter,” he said, adding that the witness statements show that the DSP and his staff did not go inside the complainant’s house.

“During interrogation accused Suhail Rizvi disclosed another story about the conspiracy hatched by co-accused persons, namely (1) Mehfooz, (2) Abdul Sattar and (3) Riaz (carpenter), and others regarding extorting money from the complainant to release the burden of loan amounting to Rs4,000,000 which were given by Mehfooz to Sattar to vacate the plot of any third person.

“The investigating officer has miserably failed to further verify such facts so as to ascertain the legal value of such a statement under Article 38 of the Qanoon-e-Shahadat Order 1984. The IO is required to investigate this aspect as to what its connection is with the information given by the federal department to SSP Imran Qureshi.

“In view of the above, I am of the opinion that DSP Umair has no nexus with this crime; however, the IO is required to remove the above defects/discrepancies and submit the report under Section 173 of the CrPC to the court for the judicial verdict as per the law.”