LHC Addresses Police Conduct in Kasur Incident

  • LHC questions the legal basis for shaving suspects’ heads.
  • Contempt notices issued to SHO, constable, and IO.
  • IG instructed to provide a comprehensive report on the Kasur situation.

The Lahore High Court (LHC) expressed strong disapproval of the Kasur police’s actions, prompted by a widely circulated video. The video depicted arrested individuals, including both boys and girls, with shaved heads. The court questioned the legal grounds under which the police humiliated these suspects and disseminated the footage via official social media channels.

Justice Ali Zia Bajwa made these remarks during a hearing regarding a contempt petition related to the Kasur incident. The case involves allegations that police detained and shaved suspects, recording the process before sharing the video online.

The court noted that the video reportedly contained scenes mixed with content from an Indian film.

The judge inquired, “Are individuals being shaved and then having their videos posted online?” He pressed for clarification on the legal justification for such actions.

He further questioned, “What law allows the police to treat people this way? Is there any rule of law in this country?”

Kasur’s district police officer (DPO) appeared in court, as previously directed, and stated that the individual responsible for recording the video had been suspended. Additionally, he mentioned that cases under the PECA Act had been filed against those who shared the video online.

The DPO also verified that a recommendation had been made to dismiss the SHO involved in the incident, due to his alleged collusion with the farmhouse owner, who has since absconded.

The court inquired about the failure to apprehend the farmhouse owner and questioned what evidence had been recovered from the site.

The DPO stated that liquor bottles were found. The Punjab prosecutor general added that the farmhouse was frequently used for immoral activities and parties.

Justice Bajwa stated that while illegal actions must be punished, publicly shaming suspects is not acceptable.

He questioned, “If someone has committed a crime, why publicise their actions instead of pursuing legal action?”

The DPO added that the investigating officer in the case had favored the suspects and that his dismissal had also been recommended. The government lawyer informed the court that the IO had requested judicial remand for the accused.

Justice Bajwa commented that “No religion or society condones such acts,” and summoned the DIG and Punjab advocate general to appear at the next hearing.

The advocate general has been instructed to clarify whether any law globally permits exposing suspects in custody in this manner.

The court also issued contempt of court notices to the IO Sadiq, a constable, and the SHO involved, questioning why they should not face six-month jail terms for violating court orders.