Strange case of missing child: PHC seeks reply as mother says cops snatched and sold her newborn
PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court (PHC) on Tuesday sought reply from Peshawar police chief and other officers in a writ petition filed by a mother claiming that a police officer snatched her two days old son and sold it to someone.
A two-member bench comprising Justice Ikramullah Khan and Justice Muhammad Ghazanfar Khan issued notice to chief capital police officer, station house officer and sub-inspector University Town Police Station as well as Dr Uzma of the Gynaecology Ward of the Khyber Teaching Hospital (KTH) in Peshawar. They were directed to submit reply in the case.
Ms Nazakat Bibi and her husband Sakhi Gul, residents of Jamrud tehsil in Khyber Agency, filed the writ petition through their lawyer Shah Faisal Utmankhel. They sought recovery of their child born in the hospital from what they alleged was illegal confinement of the police officers.
During the hearing, Shah Faisal Utmankhel submitted before the bench that the petitioner Nazakat Bibi was admitted in the Gynaecology Ward of the KTH, but due to inadvertent mistake her name was incorrectly recorded as Ms Ghazala instead of Ms Nazakat.
The lawyer said the woman was poor and after giving birth she was asking for donations so that she could pay the fare for going home along with her five-year old daughter Zakia. He said Saeed Khan, sub-inspector, forcibly snatched the two-day old infant from the mother after accusing her of selling the child. He said the police officer arrested her after showing her as a beggar under Section 54 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
The counsel argued that on the same day without any court order the police officer handed over the infant to respondent number 4, Syed Adnan Shah, a resident of Sufaid Dheri. He argued that in actual fact the child had not been physically handed over to Syed Adnan Shah as the police officer kept him in his possession.
He said when the petitioner secured her release on bail, she time and again contacted the police officers to get back the infant, but they refused her request.The counsel alleged that the police officers had sought gratification from the parents to return the baby. He said the police had also arrested Jangrez Khan, the brother of the petitioner, for levelling false allegations against the police officers.
The lawyer submitted that the parents also filed application in the district court for safe recovery of the infant, but they didn’t get any relief as their application was dismissed even after the statement of Dr Uzma of the Gynaecology Ward who said that the petitioner Nazakat Bibi had given birth to the baby, but her name was mentioned wrongly in the record.
In the grounds to the petition, it was claimed that the police officer was involved in snatching and selling the infant.It said the story developed by the police officer in the inquiry under Section 156(3) of the CrPC was baseless as there were no strange relations between the petitioners because they were wife and husband and residing in the same house. The petition said the couple had filed joint petition for the safe recovery of their child. The bench fixed February 15 for next hearing of the case.
Source
PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court (PHC) on Tuesday sought reply from Peshawar police chief and other officers in a writ petition filed by a mother claiming that a police officer snatched her two days old son and sold it to someone.
A two-member bench comprising Justice Ikramullah Khan and Justice Muhammad Ghazanfar Khan issued notice to chief capital police officer, station house officer and sub-inspector University Town Police Station as well as Dr Uzma of the Gynaecology Ward of the Khyber Teaching Hospital (KTH) in Peshawar. They were directed to submit reply in the case.
Ms Nazakat Bibi and her husband Sakhi Gul, residents of Jamrud tehsil in Khyber Agency, filed the writ petition through their lawyer Shah Faisal Utmankhel. They sought recovery of their child born in the hospital from what they alleged was illegal confinement of the police officers.
During the hearing, Shah Faisal Utmankhel submitted before the bench that the petitioner Nazakat Bibi was admitted in the Gynaecology Ward of the KTH, but due to inadvertent mistake her name was incorrectly recorded as Ms Ghazala instead of Ms Nazakat.
The lawyer said the woman was poor and after giving birth she was asking for donations so that she could pay the fare for going home along with her five-year old daughter Zakia. He said Saeed Khan, sub-inspector, forcibly snatched the two-day old infant from the mother after accusing her of selling the child. He said the police officer arrested her after showing her as a beggar under Section 54 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
The counsel argued that on the same day without any court order the police officer handed over the infant to respondent number 4, Syed Adnan Shah, a resident of Sufaid Dheri. He argued that in actual fact the child had not been physically handed over to Syed Adnan Shah as the police officer kept him in his possession.
He said when the petitioner secured her release on bail, she time and again contacted the police officers to get back the infant, but they refused her request.The counsel alleged that the police officers had sought gratification from the parents to return the baby. He said the police had also arrested Jangrez Khan, the brother of the petitioner, for levelling false allegations against the police officers.
The lawyer submitted that the parents also filed application in the district court for safe recovery of the infant, but they didn’t get any relief as their application was dismissed even after the statement of Dr Uzma of the Gynaecology Ward who said that the petitioner Nazakat Bibi had given birth to the baby, but her name was mentioned wrongly in the record.
In the grounds to the petition, it was claimed that the police officer was involved in snatching and selling the infant.It said the story developed by the police officer in the inquiry under Section 156(3) of the CrPC was baseless as there were no strange relations between the petitioners because they were wife and husband and residing in the same house. The petition said the couple had filed joint petition for the safe recovery of their child. The bench fixed February 15 for next hearing of the case.
Source
