PAKISTAN: Police complicity and judicial inaction lead to the murder of a girl on the pretext of an honour killing 

The Asian Human Rights Commission has received information that a girl was murdered on the . The police from four different districts were allegedly involved in the abduction and subsequent killing of the girl, Ms. Babli Lashari, and the matter appears to have been hushed up with the assistance of the higher judiciary.

According to the details Miss Babli Lashari, 20, and Mr. Ali Gohar Shar, her legal husband were married before a civil family judge in Khanpur, Shikarpur district, Sindh province on January 24, 2009. Babli’s marriage was opposed by the elders of the Lashari tribe who exerted pressure on her parents to annul the marriage. Assistance was sought from Mr. Siraj Durrani, the provincial minister for the local government of Sindh, as the girl was from Garhi Yasin Taluqa (town) District Shikarpur, which was the electoral constituency of the minister. The couple was hiding from the police who were assigned by the elders to detain them. On March 5 a Jirga, an illegal court conducted by landlords, was held by the tribal leader, Mr. Sikander Lashari, which declared that Babli had brought shame to the tribe and that she should be killed in the name of honour. The couple quickly decided to take help from the Women’s Police Station for lodging the girl in the Darul Aman, an official shelter house, at Sukkur city, 35 kilometers from Shikarpur.

The couple reached the Women’s Police Station, at 3 pm on March 10, and asked Miss Rukhsana Mangi, the Station House Officer (SHO), to have Babli lodged in Darul Aman, the official shelter house for women victims. Miss Rukhsana asked for Rs 50,000 (US Dollar 625) for making a report in Babli’s favour. However, the couple did not have that amount and asked her to accept Rs 8000 (US Dollar 80). She accepted the amount and informed the husband that the next day Babli would be produced before a Magistrate’s Court and then sent to the shelter. In the meantime Mr. Sikander Lashari, the elder of the Lashari tribe, after receiving information from the Women’s Police Station arrived at the station along with Babli’s mother, brother and nine other tribal members and asked that Babli be handed over to her mother. The SHO bargained with the parents, an amount of Rs 150,000 (USD 1875) was settled and Babli was handed over to the elder of the tribe. The SHO then arranged for a fake document on official paper by way of an Oath Commissioner which stated that Babli accompanied her family of her own free will and that she did not want to go to the shelter house.

On the next day, March 11, her husband, Ali Gohar Shar, arrived at the Women’s Police Station to accompany Babli to the Magistrate’s Court, but was told by the SHO, that Babli had been handed over to her parents on the instructions from the SHO’s superiors. Mr. Ali Gohar immediately filed a case in the Sindh high court, Sukkur circuit, for immediate action for her recovery. He filed a case under section 491 crpc (criminal procedure code – this section refers to an urgent matter for the saving of a life/s), but the divisional bench of the court, consisting of Justice Miss Yasmin Abbasi and Justice Mr. Ismail Bhutto, did not take it seriously and issued notices to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Shikarpur and the SHO to file a comment before the court on March 19. Mr. Shabbir Shar, an advocate and Mr. Gohar’s lawyer, requested the court to ask the police officers to produce Babli before the court in order to obtain her statement. The lawyer also informed the court that the SHO has taken a bribe from the parents and the police sold Babli to her tribe who had already announced her impending death on the .

On the date of the hearing police officials came out with the comment that Babli accompanied her parents of her own free will. The SHO smiled at the charge of bribery but did not deny it before court.

At this hearing the police did not produce Babli and stated before the court that she went of her own free will to her parent’s house. They also produced a fake marriage certificate showing that she was still married to a person by the name of Mr. Noor Mohammad Lashari, who claimed to be her husband. The lawyer asked the divisional bench of the court how they could accept the statement by the police on the matter of her marriage without obtaining her testimony. He requested the court that the district police officer or regional police officer to be present in the court and provide information of the whereabouts of Babli. But the court took no notice of the urgency of the case and again asked the same SHO of the Women’s Police Station to produce the girl before the court on March 28.

On March 28 the police produced Mr. Noor Mohammad Lashari, the man who claimed to be her husband. He told the court that Babli was not with him and that he did not know her whereabouts. Still the judges on the bench did not take cognisance of the urgency of the matter and gave April 16 as the date for next hearing. They did however, ask the investigation officer of the case, an Assistant Sub Inspector (ASI) of Police, to bring the girl before the court. The lawyer, Mr. Shabbir Shar, protested that the bench was taking too much time and that there was a real danger of Babli being killed by the tribal elders.

On April 16, as usual, the ASI came to court without Babli and his remarks to the bench showed his ignorance of the case. The lawyer again requested the court to order district police officer (DPO) of Shikarpur district, to come before the court and produce the girl. On this occasion due to his urgency and anger, the divisional bench in its order to the DPO wrote that he should, “look into the matter and take efforts for recovery of Babli”, and be present on the next hearing on April 28. The court did not make an unambiguous order for the production of the girl before court immediately and also the court did not hold the police officers responsible for their failure to produce her on previous occasions.

At the hearing of April 28, the members of the bench were changed with Justice Amir Raza and Justice Arshad Khan and their attitude towards the recovery of Babli was the same. As with the previous bench no urgency was shown. On the date, Mr. Khadim Hussain Rind, the DPO Shikarpur, came to court and handed over yet another marriage certificate of Babli’s marriage with one Mr. Akbar Almani, an Assistant, Sub Inspector of Naushehro Feroz police in another district of the province. This was also a fake marriage certificate.

This time police from a third district was involved to protect the crimes of the police. The lawyer of the applicant asked the court why this joke is being done with a serious case where the life of a girl is at stake. The lawyer asked the DPO through the court how it could be that a police official was married to a lady who had not been granted a divorce from her original husband. The DPO started laughing and reportedly the bench also joined him. The lawyer then asked the court to take action under Contempt of Court against the officers under article 204 of the Constitution for not producing the girl on the orders of the court. This time the new bench ordered the DPO of the Naushehro Feroze district, Mr. Nisar Channa, that “efforts be taken for the recovery of Babli, the alleged detainee.” The next hearing was fixed on May 7.

However, on May 7, Mr. Nisar Channa, the DPO, not only ignored the orders of the court but also was not present for the hearing. The court once again showed its inability to have the girl produced and disinterest in the case and fixed May 20 as the next date for the hearing. The lawyer of the applicant this time showed his disappointment of the court proceedings and stated that Babli might be killed before that date. This would happen, he said, because the police and perpetrators would make use of the weak response from the court and the attempt of the police of four districts to take the side of the perpetrators.

The apprehensions of the lawyer proved well-founded as within two days Babli was murdered on May 9 in the house of her so-called third husband, Mr. Almani, the ASI of Naushehro Feroz police, and her body was taken to another district, Larkana, where she was shot in the chest in order to prove that she had been killed at that location. Mr. Ali Gohar Shar, the husband of the deceased, asked the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Larkana range, to hand over her body as he, being the husband wanted to bury her according to Islamic law. However, the Larkana police quickly buried her and refused to reveal the location of the burial site.

Two different FIRs (first information reports) a necessary document for legal process, were filed in same police station of Dhari, Larkana district, one by Mr. Zamir Lashari, the cousin of Babli and other one from the SHO of Dhari police station , Larkana. The application for a third FIR was filed before the High Court, Sukkur bench by Mr. Ali Gohar. In the first FIR, Babli’s cousin accused Mr. Alam Lashi, her elder brother of murdering her. In second FIR, by the police, the same words were used as in the first FIR. In both cases Mr. Ali Gohar was accused of kidnapping her. But in the FIR filed by Ali Gohar, he asked the court to order the police to arrest 12 persons which he named as those likely to have murdered her.

Babli’s murder is a case that reveals how police abuse their power when a case against a police officer is lodged. To save the SHO of the Women’s Police Station the police from four districts covered up for her and as a result finally the girl was killed. As the witnesses to this case would have been the police officers themselves the officers protect each other there is no eye witnesses to come forward to give evidence. After strong reactions from media, particularly from the Sindhi media, an enquiry committee was formed under Mr. Aitzaz Goraya, the Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) who, instead of conducting a proper inquiry protected one of the alleged perpetrators, Miss Rukhsana Mangi by stating that she took only Rs 18,000 (Rs 8000 from Babli’s husband and Rs 10,000 from the family) and that this was her only ‘crime’. The police are well aware that the higher judicial officials who are sent to small cities remain under the obligations and protection from the police and therefore, they will not go against the local police. The judges who heard this case were appointed during the state of emergency imposed by General Musharraf when there was a strong movement for the restoration of the judiciary. These judges are too weak to stand for the protection of the interests of justice as against the powerful interests of some police officers.

The High Court, Sukkur bench, has never asked the police about  the paper prepared by a fake oath commissioner in which it was said that Babli wanted to rejoin her family of her own free will and that she was not married with Mr. Ali Gohar Shar. The document did not bear Babli’s signature having only the signature of so called oath commissioner and furthermore, it was not attested to by a first class magistrate. This is a necessary regulation according to an amendment made in 1990, which says that any paper or document prepared by the oath commissioners have no status before the law until and unless it is attested by a first class magistrate. The fake statement from Babli should not have been accepted by the high court bench.

The judges, who were sitting on the divisional bench of Sukkur circuit also have the same responsibility as the police of the four districts who managed to provide help in the killing of a girl. A very prominent saying about delivery of justice is that “Justice delayed is justice denied”.

Initially the case was filed on March 16. According to the law a person held in unlawful confinement should be brought before court immediately. But all four judges who were sitting on the divisional bench never considered this law, perhaps because of the police power at the districts in the interior of the country. It is in this way that the delay in the proceedings by the judges has helped the perpetrators to get rid of the girl.

The judges, sitting on the benches, were also very much ignorant about the judicial reforms introduced by the chief justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan on May 5, 2009. This means that the reforms have not trickled down to the highest courts of a province and the judges respect the police version rather than bending themselves before the judicial reforms.

The Asian Human Rights Commission calls for a credible inquiry into Babli’s murder. This inquiry should include the culpability of the police officers of the four districts, Larkana, Sukkur, Shikarpur and Naushehro Feroz. Pending this inquiry these officers should be suspended from service. The SHO of the Women’s Police Station of Sukkur must be brought to justice for her failure to protect a person in her custody and for accepting bribes. She should be treated as an accomplice to the girl’s murder. The Chief Justice and the Supreme Court should take immediate action to ensure a proper inquiry into this case and also to scrutinise the actions of the relevant courts which failed to take appropriate action according to the law to protect Babli.