The Supreme Court, in a case concerning the custodial death of a citizen, upheld that the state has a duty to protect the ‘right to life’ of citizens and to prevent custodial violence and killings, it emerged on Saturday.
The case pertains to the custodial killing of Zaryab Khan, who was detained in 2020 in Punjab’s Dera Ghazi Khan, and later died in police custody. It was alleged that two officials of the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) tortured the detainee and caused his custodial death. They were later acquitted by a criminal court but were dismissed from service over misconduct by the regional police officer. Subsequently, they filed an appeal with the SC, arguing that the dismissal is “baseless” if they have been acquitted in the case.
In a seven-page judgment, authored by Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, SC dismissed the petitions and upheld the earlier ruling.
“The Constitution imposes a duty upon the State to protect the right to life of every citizen and to prevent custodial violence and killings.”
The judgment — a copy of which is available with Dawn — is dated August 21.
“The right to life has been categorised as the supreme human right, which is codified in every major human rights treaty,” Justice Mandokhail stressed.
“These Constitutional guarantees against illegal detention, arrest, brutality, torture and extra-judicial killings in any form are bedrock legal and fundamental principles enshrined in the Constitution; therefore, illegal detention and torture are neither encouraged nor justified under any circumstances,” he said.
Justice Mandokhail ruled that “torture and other cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment, including outrages upon personal dignity are not permitted in any circumstance, as it is against human dignity and the rule of law.”
He noted that at times “torture led to extrajudicial killings by the police, presuming de facto impunity and as a means of bringing [the] alleged criminal to justice”.
The judge also called for an “effective, dedicated, external” oversight of the police, terming it “the need of the hour”.
Justice Mandokhail highlighted that, according to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), “everyone is entitled to rights and freedom without discrimination, including the right to life, liberty, and security of person, and protection from torture, slavery, and degrading treatment”.
Citing Article 4 of the Constitution, the ruling stated that “no action detrimental to the life, liberty, body, reputation or property of any person shall be taken, save in accordance with law.”
“Protection of law and to be treated in accordance with the law is the inalienable right of every citizen,” Justice Mandokhail ruled.
He went on to say: “Article 10 of the Constitution provides safeguards as to arrest and detention of a person.
“It mandates that no person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed of the grounds of such arrest and shall be produced before the Magistrate within a period of 24 hours of such arrest.”
Justice Mandokhail, citing Article 14 of the Constitution, further stated that it stipulates that “the dignity of a man, and subject to law, privacy of home shall be inviolable. It further mandates that no person shall be subjected to torture”.
He stressed that the individual must be allowed due process, calling it a “fundamental right”.
Justice Mandokhail noted that the “police force is the custodian of law” and as the custodian, it had a duty to “preserve the framework of fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution”.
“It is bound to provide security and to protect life, liberty and the dignity of a person,” he stressed.
“When a government functionary harms a person without following the law, this not only constitutes a fundamental rights violation, but also violates due process of law, guaranteed by the Constitution,” Justice Mandokhail said in the judgment.
However, it highlighted that while “there is no denial of the fact that the police [have] the authority to arrest any person who violates the law, but any such action without adopting the due process provided by the Constitution and law, and treating such person [inhumanely], cruelly and subjecting that person to torture, constitutes not only a criminal act, but also amounts to a misconduct”.
The judge ruled that the police officials had acted in violation of their duty as per law “by detaining Zaryab Khan illegally and subjecting him to torture”.
The act amounted to “misuse of authority” falling within the definition of grave misconduct, defined in sub-rule (iii) of Rule 2 of the Rules of 1975.
In October, former SC judge Justice Athar Minallah had termed extra-judicial killings, custodial torture and the excessive use of force as the most “intolerable crimes” in a democratic society, calling them the “worst form of violation” of the Constitution.
According to data compiled by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP), Punjab has witnessed more than 500 alleged encounters since January 2025, resulting in over 670 fatalities — a figure higher than in any other province.
from Dawn - Home https://ift.tt/2Psha6C
Comments
Post a Comment