he failure of investigation and prosecution to prove their cases of street crime in Karachi is a significant problem. The failure undermines the rule of law as well as public trust in the justice system.

The inability of law enforcement agencies and the prosecution to solve cases and bring criminals to justice perpetuates a culture of impunity and emboldens the criminals to continue their activities.

One of the main reasons for the failure of investigation and prosecution to prove cases of street crimes is a lack of resources and expertise. The police force is understaffed, under-trained and ill-equipped to handle the high rate of street crimes. There is also a lack of coordination between various law enforcement agencies.

The police lack the necessary technical expertise, such as forensic science and modern investigative techniques, to solve complicated cases. As a result, many cases remain unresolved.

Another reason for the failure of investigation and prosecution is corruption in the police force and the judiciary. Corruption in the justice system undermines the effectiveness of the law enforcement agencies and the prosecution. Corrupt officials are likely to accept bribes and favours from criminals, making it easier for criminals to evade the law and continue their criminal activities. Corruption also reduces the public’s confidence in the justice system and undermines the legitimacy of the government institutions.

Furthermore, prosecution’s failure to prove cases of street crime is due to a lack of effective legal measures. The legal system in Pakistan is slow, cumbersome and often ineffective, resulting in long delays and many adjournments. The prosecution lacks the necessary tools to gather evidence such as forensic science and modern investigative techniques. This makes it difficult for them to build a strong case and prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.

Another significant factor contributing to the failure of investigation and prosecution is witness intimidation. Witnesses are often afraid to testify in court due to fear of retaliation from criminals. This makes it difficult for the prosecution to build a strong case and prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. Witness protection programmes in Pakistan are inadequate and do not provide sufficient protection to witnesses, further exacerbating the problem.

To address the problem of the failure of investigation and prosecution to prove cases of street crime, there is a need for a multi-pronged approach. It requires legal reforms, increased resources and effective witness protection programmes.

To address the problem of the failure of investigation and prosecution to prove cases of street crimes, there is a need for a multi-pronged approach that involves legal reforms, increased resources and effective witness protection. 

Legal reforms should focus on improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the justice system. This can be achieved through the establishment of special courts and tribunals to deal with street crimes and the introduction of modern investigative techniques such as DNA testing and digital forensics.

There is also a need for increased resources for law enforcement agencies and the prosecution. The police force should be provided with adequate resources including training, equipment and forensic labs. The prosecution should be provided with the necessary tools to gather evidence such as forensic science and modern investigative techniques. This will enable them to build a strong case and prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.

Effective witness protection programmes should be established to protect witnesses from intimidation and retaliation. Witness protection programmes should provide adequate protection to witnesses including relocation, financial assistance and counselling. This will encourage witnesses to come forward and testify in court, making it easier for the prosecution to build a strong case and prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Supreme Court has held that “Courts need to understand and be open to science and its principles, tools and techniques. Legal decisions of the court must fall within the boundaries of scientifically sound knowledge. A judge, and more so a trial judge, acts as a gatekeeper of the scientific evidence and must, therefore, enjoy a good sense and understanding of science. As science grows, so will the forensic techniques, tools and devices. Therefore, courts must be open to developments in forensic science and embrace new techniques and devices to resolve a dispute, provided the said techniques and device is well established and widely accepted in the scientific community as a credible and reliable.”

The Federal Shariat Court had remarked in the case of Mst. Asho and others vs The State, “Mere levelling of accusations against a person in an FIR does not make him an accused person unless and until some evidence implicating such a person in the commission of the offence is available.”

Law enforcement agencies have not only failed to eliminate street crime but also failed to recover stolen valuables.

The recovery ratio of the stolen cars, motorcycles and mobile phones is no more than 10 percent.

In many cases, police personnel are found involved in street crimes.

The author is associated with Jang Group as a legal advisor. He also practices law as an advocate of the Sindh High Court. He is pursuing a doctorate in law at SZABUL. He can be reached at advocate.ahmed @ymail.com