LAHORE: The tussle between SP (Investigations Cantt) Anoush Masood Chaudhry and her immediate boss SSP Investigations Abdul Ghaffar Qaisrani has not only exposed the poor command of CCPO Lahore Umar Sheikh but also the most trumpeted slogan of police reforms.
The language used by the said SP in a reply to a letter of advice, written by SSP Investigations, is too harsh and straight in terms of protocols of a disciplined force.
On Dec 5, the SSP Investigations had written a letter of advice to SP Anoush, highlighting her lack of interest in performing official duties. He advised her to improve her performance. The letter, a copy of which is available with The News, reads: “Cantt Division is an important and challenging division for policing. Hence, to gain quality performance, it requires proper hands-on supervision.
“But it has come to the notice of the undersigned that you, being supervisory officer of the Cantt Division, are not taking due interest in the official affairs.
“Your presence in the office has been checked many times and it was found that you are not giving proper time to your office. This adds to the miseries of complainants and parties coming to meet the supervisory officers on one hand and increases burden on the senior officers on the other.”
The second paragraph of the advice letter reads, “During the divisional crime meeting by the undersigned, it transpired that many high profile cases like murder, etc., were either not in your notice or you were not properly acquainted with facts of such cases of your division.
“Thirdly, it has been directed by the undersigned (SSP Investigations) many a time to attend the meeting of District Standing Board for change of investigation after hearing the parties prior to the board meetings to assist the board in deciding the cases on merit. But, unfortunately this had not been complied with on a number of occasions.
“Moreover, during the board meetings, in some cases the board decision was kept pending and cases were referred back to you for re-verification. Again, instead of thorough report, stereotype reports were sent which created confusion for the board in deciding the change of investigation.
“It has been observed that despite clear instructions from the undersigned to accompany the senior officers for their assistance whenever they are called in person in high court, you did not turn up on many occasions to assist the seniors.
“You are, therefore, advised to focus on the above highlighted issues and put up all efforts in discharging your official duties to redress the grievances of the general public and efficiently supervise your division.”
SP Anoush Masood Chaudhry took the advice the other way around and in her reply, she warned the SSP to refrain from misleading seniors. Rather, she advised him to review this kind of “callous, rude and biased behaviour” with the SP.
She wrote that the letter of advice was based on false perceptions and misjudgements. “Your attitude towards the undersigned has been biased since the beginning and this letter of advice, based on totally false perceptions and contrary to the facts, speaks volumes about that.
“Your callous behaviour with a fellow officer, who’s very dutiful and diligent, is highly objectionable.”
The reply said: “Firstly, you are falsely accusing the undersigned of not meeting complainants and parties coming to the SP office, as the undersigned maintained a full record of the matter with thumb impressions and signatures of the complainants and parties coming to the SP office.
“Secondly, the undersigned is in knowledge of high profile cases of her division. The undersigned has never missed any District Standing Board meeting. Contrary to that, you decide the fate of the cases without consulting the divisional SP.
“The undersigned has never missed matters of the high court. This is the priority matter for the undersigned.
“All the points you have written in your letter are totally baseless, exaggerated and based on your personal bias.
“Moreover, your undue interference in the domain of the undersigned highly affects deliverance of justice to the aggrieved general public.
“Your letter explicitly represents a frustrated effort to interfere in a very inappropriate manner.
“You also spoke to the undersigned very rudely on phone regarding a particular matter despite getting the knowledge that the rightful direction had been followed, given by the high command,” added the reply.
CCPO Lahore Umar Sheikh had used harsh words with the SSP Investigations in a meeting reportedly over writing a letter of advice to SP Anoush. The SSP Investigations left the meeting and apprised the IGP of the situation. The IGP has asked the AIG administration to hold an inquiry into the matter.
CCPO Umar Sheikh was contacted over the issue, but he did not respond to calls and messages of this correspondent.
