karachi
MPA (400+ posts)
Cases withdrawn under Section 494, not NRO
Monday, July 05, 2010
By Shamim Bano
Karachi
None of the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) cases sent to the five district judges of the lower courts were withdrawn under the Ordinance, according to well-placed sources. These cases were, in fact, disposed of under Section 494 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), the sources told The News.
A number of cases were withdrawn by the government back in 2002, as per the powers vested by the Constitution under Section 494 of the CrPC, the sources said. This step of the government cannot even be challenged by the judiciary, they added, explaining that none of the aggrieved parties ever contacted any court to reopen a case.
The sources said that on Saturday, the courts submitted a final list of vetted cases to the Member Inspection Team-II (MIT) of the Sindh High Court (SHC), informing him that the requisite information for all cases pertaining to the NRO proved that none of these cases were withdrawn under the provisions of Section 2 of the Ordinance, but in fact, through Section 494 of the CrPc.
Section 494, titled Effect of withdrawal from prosecution, allows any public prosecutor, with the consent of the court before a judgment is pronounced, to withdraw from the prosecution of any person either generally or in respect of anyone or more of the offences for which he is tried.
The relevant section of the law reads: If (the withdrawal) is made before a charge has been framed, the accused shall be discharged in respect of such offence or offences; if it is made after a charge has been framed or when under this Code, no charge is required, he shall be acquitted in respect of such offence or offences.
A list of cases was supplied to the lower courts by the Sindh Prosecutor General Shahadat Awan, sources explained, adding that even the police did not verify any information before passing it on to the prosecutor general. In all, a list of about 3,700 cases pertaining to Sindh was forwarded, sources added.
Sources argued that the process of vetting NRO cases should have been routed through the Home Department, since it has a list of all cases and accused. While the judiciary was accused of setting criminals scot free, the Home Department evaded all responsibility that it should have shouldered, sources said.
Many of the NRO cases forwarded were redundant. For example, some 113 cases were given to District South. Of those, records of only 62 cases were available for the court staff, while no challan was submitted before any magistrate or police in the remaining ones, sources said.
The 62 cases had already been disposed of by the court, while none of the cases provided in the list were pending. Similarly, 51 challans were submitted by the police before the (now-defunct) assistant commissioner and sub-divisional magistrate, prior to the separation of the judiciary. However, their record is unavailable, sources said.
It is worth remembering here that the Supreme Court of Pakistan had issued a notice to all high courts of the country, seeking complete details of cases that had benefitted from the NRO. On Saturday before last, the SHC had discussed the NRO cases at a meeting with the judges of the five district courts. Following that meeting, the district judges had asked their respective court staff to attend courts on Sunday to compile the NRO record to be provided to the Supreme Court.
District South was given 112 cases, of which four were beneficiaries of the NRO, sources said. District Central got 1,665 cases of which about 50 per cent had been resolved under the NRO. In District East, about 950 cases were provided, of which one case had benefited under the NRO, whereas in District West, 650 cases were reported but all of them were acquitted or disposed of either on merit or judgment and none of them fell under the NRO.
In their final comments submitted to the MIT, the district judges observed that a record of the cases was not available with the court, and in most of the requisite cases, challans were not submitted before any judicial magistrate concerned, while the same was the case with the police. The judges further submitted that none of the cases whose record is available were withdrawn under the NRO.
Sources revealed that the prosecution had even submitted a list of those cases which had either been disposed of on merit or by judgment even before the promulgation of the NRO, but their names were placed under the NRO beneficiary list.
Meanwhile, another round of meetings was held this Saturday between the prosecutor general, MIT and district judges, sources revealed, adding that the outcome of these meetings is awaited.
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=248848
By Shamim Bano
Karachi
None of the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) cases sent to the five district judges of the lower courts were withdrawn under the Ordinance, according to well-placed sources. These cases were, in fact, disposed of under Section 494 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), the sources told The News.
A number of cases were withdrawn by the government back in 2002, as per the powers vested by the Constitution under Section 494 of the CrPC, the sources said. This step of the government cannot even be challenged by the judiciary, they added, explaining that none of the aggrieved parties ever contacted any court to reopen a case.
The sources said that on Saturday, the courts submitted a final list of vetted cases to the Member Inspection Team-II (MIT) of the Sindh High Court (SHC), informing him that the requisite information for all cases pertaining to the NRO proved that none of these cases were withdrawn under the provisions of Section 2 of the Ordinance, but in fact, through Section 494 of the CrPc.
Section 494, titled Effect of withdrawal from prosecution, allows any public prosecutor, with the consent of the court before a judgment is pronounced, to withdraw from the prosecution of any person either generally or in respect of anyone or more of the offences for which he is tried.
The relevant section of the law reads: If (the withdrawal) is made before a charge has been framed, the accused shall be discharged in respect of such offence or offences; if it is made after a charge has been framed or when under this Code, no charge is required, he shall be acquitted in respect of such offence or offences.
A list of cases was supplied to the lower courts by the Sindh Prosecutor General Shahadat Awan, sources explained, adding that even the police did not verify any information before passing it on to the prosecutor general. In all, a list of about 3,700 cases pertaining to Sindh was forwarded, sources added.
Sources argued that the process of vetting NRO cases should have been routed through the Home Department, since it has a list of all cases and accused. While the judiciary was accused of setting criminals scot free, the Home Department evaded all responsibility that it should have shouldered, sources said.
Many of the NRO cases forwarded were redundant. For example, some 113 cases were given to District South. Of those, records of only 62 cases were available for the court staff, while no challan was submitted before any magistrate or police in the remaining ones, sources said.
The 62 cases had already been disposed of by the court, while none of the cases provided in the list were pending. Similarly, 51 challans were submitted by the police before the (now-defunct) assistant commissioner and sub-divisional magistrate, prior to the separation of the judiciary. However, their record is unavailable, sources said.
It is worth remembering here that the Supreme Court of Pakistan had issued a notice to all high courts of the country, seeking complete details of cases that had benefitted from the NRO. On Saturday before last, the SHC had discussed the NRO cases at a meeting with the judges of the five district courts. Following that meeting, the district judges had asked their respective court staff to attend courts on Sunday to compile the NRO record to be provided to the Supreme Court.
District South was given 112 cases, of which four were beneficiaries of the NRO, sources said. District Central got 1,665 cases of which about 50 per cent had been resolved under the NRO. In District East, about 950 cases were provided, of which one case had benefited under the NRO, whereas in District West, 650 cases were reported but all of them were acquitted or disposed of either on merit or judgment and none of them fell under the NRO.
In their final comments submitted to the MIT, the district judges observed that a record of the cases was not available with the court, and in most of the requisite cases, challans were not submitted before any judicial magistrate concerned, while the same was the case with the police. The judges further submitted that none of the cases whose record is available were withdrawn under the NRO.
Sources revealed that the prosecution had even submitted a list of those cases which had either been disposed of on merit or by judgment even before the promulgation of the NRO, but their names were placed under the NRO beneficiary list.
Meanwhile, another round of meetings was held this Saturday between the prosecutor general, MIT and district judges, sources revealed, adding that the outcome of these meetings is awaited.
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=248848
