LAHORE (Staff Report) — In a shocking event at Lahore High Court (LHC), concerns arise over reported theft of fines amounting 5 Lac and 55 thousand rupees collected by the Drug Court Gujranwala. This incident demanded for a fair investigation to ensure justice and prevent any wrongdoing.
The FIR filed by Furqan, an employee at the drug court, has stirred up suspicions about a theft under mysterious circumstances. This has led to questions being raised about the security protocols and procedures of submitting fines at the court. The complaint points out several differences and unanswered questions, prompting demands for an unbiased probe to uncover the truth behind the alleged theft.
According to the report, the theft occurred within the secure jurisdiction of the LHC, a place where such criminal activities are expected to be nearly impossible. The applicant allegedly nominated the employees of the contractor operating the canteen at the High Court Iqbal Lounge as accused.
The FIR mentions three Drug Court employees as eyewitnesses, raising concerns about their credibility since they allegedly saw the theft but didn’t act or report it promptly. Furthermore, the involvement of the court staff in the direct handling of cash transactions, which deviates from standard procedures, adds complexity to the case.
Firstly, it’s questioned why the court staff had to travel to Lahore to submit the court fine, especially when previously, such transactions were conducted locally in Gujranwala. Moreover, the timing of their visit, outside regular banking hours, and without police security, adds to suspicions.
The matter also shows the discrepancies in the handling of monetary matters by court staff. Typically, fines are deposited by the accused themselves into designated government accounts using challan form 32-A. Staff involvement in direct cash dealings necessitates a thorough probe.
Doubts arise over the legitimacy of instructions for court staff to travel to Lahore without an official order. Concerns mount over the functionality of Gujranwala’s Drug Court due to incomplete quorum during fine imposition, raising questions about the validity of fines under the Drug Act.
Furthermore, discrepancies in the FIR filed by Furqan, particularly regarding his literacy level to draft the document in English and the absence of his own money in the theft, raise suspicions about the authenticity of the claims made. Lack of documented court orders authorising Lahore visit and choice of lower-ranked staff for deposit duty deepen intrigue.
It is noteworthy here that the cell locations of the accused and witnesses might be identified as potential sources of evidence to either validate or refute the claims made in the FIR, stressing the need for a comprehensive investigation.
The recent incident regarding the sanctity of the Lahore High Court compound also poses a key challenge for the new LHC Chief Justice. Questions arise about the FIR’s filing with the LHC Bar’s knowledge, responsible for overseeing service contracts like the canteen. There are also concerns about involvement of judiciary members. This prompts further investigation into why the implicated canteen contractor is still permitted to operate within the court premises.
Due to these apprehensions, a thorough investigation must be conducted to uncover the truth behind the theft at the Drug Court in Gujranwala. The integrity of the judicial system and the security of court funds must be upheld to ensure justice for all.
