HYDERABAD: The petitioners in the Naila Rind alleged murder
case have termed “incomplete” the probe report submitted recently to
Sindh High Court Hyderabad circuit bench by a sessions judge on the
Sindh University student’s death, seen by the victim’s friends and
relatives as murder.
Inderjeet Mal, one of the
petitioners who had approached the Hyderabad circuit bench of the SHC in
the wake of Naila’s mysterious death, said in the objections filed in
SHC through Ali Palh advocate on Monday that the report had missed many
vital links in the case.
He said the report did not
discuss the first FIR lodged by police under an outdated ordinance of
2009 that indicated inefficiency and mala fide intentions on the part of
police.
The report failed to notice what Naila was
doing in the hostel during holidays. It quoted hostel warden Mehjabeen
as claiming that Naila had come to obtain leave but did not elaborate on
why the leave was being sought and whether it was for visiting home or a
friend or for some other purpose, he said.
He said the
report noted that some girls were present in room No. 21 but failed to
give their names nor did it treat them as witnesses. Their statements
were also not recorded by the judge, he said.
The
petitioner said that at line No. 7 on page No. 9 of the report the room
where Naila was staying was mentioned as 36-A of undergraduate hostel
and at another place it made mention of only room No. 36 “which was not
sealed” but failed to provide reasons why it was so because it risked
destruction of vital pieces of evidence hitherto uncollected.
He
said the report talked about blank strips of anti-anxiety pills found
in a dustbin in the room but failed to probe this aspect in detail.
Statements of two roommates of Naila were also not recorded, he said.
Nisar
Rind, Naila’s brother, had hinted at harassment as well as threats his
sister was receiving from someone but the report did not make any
attempt to find out that person and failed to say what kind of mechanism
was available in the university for dealing with the issue of girls’
harassment, he said.
He said the report did not say what
kind of forensic or digital tools were used to collect additional pieces
of evidence which were not part of the earlier investigation by police.
Mr Mal said the report was silent on the fact that parents had complained to media about marks of violence on Naila’s body.
At
page 19 the report referred to a messaging group of male and female
students of the university but failed to explain if there existed any
mechanism for handling harassment of a girl through such means of
communication.
The report gave hanging as cause of her death but did not say if she had committed suicide, he said.
After
receiving the petitioners’ objections, the division bench comprising
Justices Mohammad Iqbal Kalhoro and Khadim Hussain M. Shaikh adjourned
the matter to Dec 28 for further proceedings.
