They say, let the law take its course, as an umbrella for the actions of the government and judiciary. But last week, a 9-month-old was accused of attacking a police team, and the court processed it in the same vein. Several relevant sections of the law and countless court rulings were put aside by the police and the courts in dealing with this case and the law took quite an unnatural course.
The court treated the suckling as a suspect and granted him bail against surety bonds worth Rs50,000. The court also directed him to appear in court on the next date of hearing. The media went to town over the case and four days after the court ruling, the police declared the child innocent and removed his name from the case FIR on Saturday.
The concept of bail implies that the court and the Prosecution Department consider the appellant a suspect, but release him/her on surety bonds considering the possibility that he/she might be acquitted in trial.
Under Section 249-A of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, a magistrate has the authority to acquit a suspect at any stage of a case if he/she believes that the charge is baseless or that there is no possibility of the suspect being convicted of any offence.
Furthermore, according to Section 250 of the CrPC, if a magistrate acquits some suspects, and is of the opinion that the accusation against them or any of them was false, frivolous or vexatious, the magistrate can direct the complainant to show cause why he should not pay compensation to the suspects.
Even if these aforementioned legal provisions are set aside, Section 82 of the Pakistan Penal Code states that “Nothing is an offence, which is done by a child under seven years of age”.
Ignorance of these laws by the additional district and sessions judge in this case places a question mark on his performance, especially since he went ahead and granted the child bail considering him a suspect and taking him to trial. In Muhammad Ali versus Muhammad Aslam 2002 MLD 726, the Sindh High Court ruled that under Section 561-A, CrPC, in cases where there is an apparent miscarriage of justice and no possibility of any kind of conviction, and where the continuation of proceedings amounts to abuse of the process of law, the High Court must interfere and if the prosecution, on the face of it, is illegal, the proceedings in such cases can be legally quashed.
Contempt of court
Last week, Justice Khalid Mahmood Khan of the LHC summoned the housing and urban development secretary to court. He is accused of contempt of court. The judge issued the notice on a reply the secretary had filed to a contempt of court petition by an engineer. The court had previously ordered the reversal of the engineer’s transfer orders, but the secretary had suspended him instead.
Bagram prisoners
Last week, the Ministry for Foreign Affairs informed the LHC that 11 Pakistanis were scheduled to be released from Bagram Prison next month.
A law officer presenting the ministry’s reply, informed the court that the detainees would be released by the end of May. This is in response to a petition by the Justice Project Pakistan (JPP), counsel for the families of Pakistani citizens ‘illegally’ detained in Bagram Prison.
Published in The Express Tribune, April 7th, 2014.