Inquiry exonerates SHO from allegations in murder probe


ChitralToday. Aslam Baig, 24, son of Purdoom of Brep, was found dead on the night of April 14 last year. After his death, his wife told his elderly grandfather that he had suffered a heart attack. The father of the victim was in Islamabad at the time of the incident. The deceased was buried without informing the police about his mysterious death even though his relatives had seen marks of wounds on the body. Murder case probe: inquiry exonerates SHO from allegations The relatives of the deceased approached the police to register a case against police constable Shahabul Amin and Zakira, the widow of Aslam Baig, after the two contracted court marriage on Oct 10, 2017. The police after a delay of a few days registered a murder case against the two suspects. The woman was arrested on Oct 22 from Ragh village where she along with the first wife of the man was living in a rented house. The constable was later also arrested. However, the two suspects were later released by a court in Chitral on bail. The relatives of the deceased alleged that the SHO had carried out a weak investigation due to which the accused were granted bail. They also alleged that the father of the deceased was forced to pay Rs35,000 to a private vehicle used by the police during the investigation of the case. The police authorities ordered an inquiry into the allegations which was carried out by the additional superintendent of police and a deputy superintendent of the police. The inquiry report signed by the additional SP (copy available with ChitralToday) stated that on Nov 11, 2017, the court of additional district and sessions judge Chitral, Ahmed Iftikhar, granted bail to the two suspects on the following grounds: 1. Delay in the registration of FIR 2. There is no direct evidence to support the prosecution story and 3. Except for the motive itself, there is no substantial evidence to link the accused with the commission of offence. According to the inquiry report, the relatives had leveled six allegations against the SHO. They were as follow: 1. SHO Mastuj intimidated the complainant as well as the witnesses not to press for the registration of the FIR as there was no life in the long delayed case. 2. The police manipulated the statements of the witnesses which led to the release of the two suspects held in the murder case. 3. The complainant in the case paid Rs35,000 to the driver of a taxi used by the police during the investigation of the murder case. 4. Police kept one Hidayat Khan, son of Hakim Khan of Brep, in lock-up for 24 hours. 5. The accused, Shahabul Amin, is freely moving in the area and pressurizing the complainant that he is a police commando and has helping hand of the local police. Similarly, the father of Zakira, the widow of the deceased who has now married the accused, is also a police man. Both are hurdles in providing justice to the complainant. 6. Police has sent samples from the body of the deceased to lab but without taking the complainant on board. So the police is likely to manipulate the opinion of lab. The inquiry report mentioned following findings to the allegations mentioned above: 1. SHO Mastuj visited the house of the complainant and without any fatehakhwani told them that they had omitted to give information of the offence to the police which was itself an offence. The SHO exerted no pressure on them as the FIR was registered two days back. 2. Police has not changed any statement of the witnesses and the investigation is up to the mark. The court while granting bail to the accused pointed out no deficiency in the investigation. 3. There is only one vehicle in the police station for routine patrolling, and no other vehicle for investigation. So according to the complainant, he paid Rs35,000 for a private vehicle. But the SHO has expressed ignorance about such payments by the complainant. Similarly, Azam Khan, SI/IO of the case (now retired) was contacted who also expressed similar views like that of the SHO. Further, he said he did not witness any such payments by the complainant to any driver. Khan said during the investigation he used two private vehicles, one for visit to village Zupu and the other to Chitral. 4. The allegation about locking up of Hidayat Khan was false as he was arrested on the basis of a written application to the police by a local of Brep. 5. Allegation No 5 is also baseless as accused Shahabul Amin was arrested and interrogated by the police but later released by court, not by the police. He is still under suspension and an inquiry is under progress. 6. Allegation No 6 is also baseless. Usually the police send samples to lab without any consultation with the complainant. So manipulation of samples by the police is out of question. The inquiry team questioned the SHO who said that on Jan 24, 2018, he raided the house of Hidayat in Brep and recovered two litres of Tara from the house which led to a protest by the people of Brep the following day. The SHO said the protest was a reaction to the raid on the pretext of a defective investigation in the under case of the young man. The inquiry report stated that when the complainant party had observed signs of violence on the body of the deceased why they did not report the matter to the police. “They have intentionally omitted to give information about a cognizable offence to the police which is itself an offence under Section 202 of PPC (Pakistan Penal Code).” There is no prior relation between the parties then what was the logic behind the frequent visits of the accused to the house of the complainant (father of the deceased). There is no laxity on part of either the investigation or operation wing of the police. The investigation is up to the mark, the report added. “Shafi Shifa SHO has met all the requirements of investigation as well as operation. He just badly failed in fellowship behaviour and to judge the sentiments of the bereaved family. It is evident that he least bothered to offer any Fateha to the bereaved family or interdine with them which made them more infuriated. The complainant was given patient hearing who wants the transfer of the SHO and nothing more,” concluded the inquiry report.   Published in ChitralToday on March 1, 2018.]]>

  1. Shahid Ahmad Chitrali says

    The accused was granted bails on the basis of lacks of evidence which is itself the laxity of the prosecution. The accused is a police cop and that is why the police behavior has been suspicious. Despite the clear motives the police have made a weak case which led to the release of the accused which is very unfortunate and is not good for the future of crimes in Chitral. There must have been a joint investigation with community members’ inclusion as well. The people of Brep should demand for a re-investigation as well as approach the superior courts. The civil society must also join hands with the vitim’s family. This is a very sad that the accused are roaming free. For future the police needs to itself conduct full investigation including autopsy of all such sudden death case where an iota of suspicion looms in order to be clear about the possibility of murder and that is the responsibility of the police. The money taken from the complainant also speaks collusion.

  2. Mr. Baig says

    I am totally agree with the above comments

  3. Dr-khalil says

    I think the People of Brep can take forward the case to higher courts .. it is not mentioned, who investigated the case ?? if the investigators were the coworker police guys the investigation could never be unbiased i believe ..

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.

error: Content is protected !!