The Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court has decided not to take suo-motu notice regarding the abduction of a child in Quetta.
A five-member bench, led by Justice Ameenuddin Khan, heard the case on the child’s abduction, as reported by Express News.
During the proceedings, Attorney General Mansoor Usman Awan briefed the court on a confidential progress report related to the abduction, requesting the bench to review the report privately and discuss the formation of a joint investigation team (JIT) for the child’s recovery.
Justice Jamal Mandokhail clarified that the case was already under review and dismissed any claims that the Constitutional Bench had taken suo-motu notice of the incident. After reviewing the report in chambers, the bench resumed the hearing.
A lawyer representing the Balochistan government then asked the court to intervene in ending the ongoing sit-in in Quetta. However, Justice Musarrat Hilali stated that resolving such matters was the responsibility of the local administration, with support from the federal government if necessary.
The child’s father appeared in court, pleading for his child’s safe return. Justice Mandokhail reassured him, emphasizing that full cooperation would be extended from all sides, and added that the police chief had provided detailed information in chambers. However, he also warned that certain details could not be disclosed to avoid compromising the investigation and urged the media to limit coverage to protect the child’s life.
Justice Ameenuddin Khan concluded by stressing that the case had not been resolved in the Supreme Court and warned that increasing pressure could jeopardize the child’s safety.
Earlier, reports had emerged suggesting that the Constitutional Bench had taken suo-motu notice of the missing child in Quetta and summoned all provincial Inspectors General of Police (IGs) for the case.
In the earlier hearing, the bench summoned the IGs and Home Secretaries from all provinces for the next hearing. Justice Jamal Mandokhail expressed concern over the failure to recover the missing child in Quetta, noting that despite protests paralyzing the city for six days, the government appeared indifferent. He pointed out that even schoolchildren in Quetta had taken to the streets in protest.
Justice Musarrat Hilali raised concerns about the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa report, which claimed no cases of sex trafficking, questioning how such a claim could be made given the ongoing issue. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar inquired whether any provincial body or commission was working on the issue of missing children, especially considering the 18th Amendment’s empowerment of provinces.
Justice Mandokhail observed that Balochistan had been shut down due to the abduction, but the government seemed unconcerned. He also criticized the lack of preparation by government lawyers on this pressing issue.
The bench was also informed that the Supreme Court’s committee on child abductions, established in 2018, had not taken any substantial action. The petitioner claimed that the committee was never actually formed, but the Additional Advocate General of Balochistan promised to submit a report on the matter.
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar emphasized that the court needed more than just reports; it required tangible actions to address child abductions. Justice Mandokhail called for a wider investigation, questioning why authorities were not taking stronger measures to prevent child abductions.
The bench also scrutinized the role of law enforcement, with Justice Mandokhail questioning the Frontier Corps’ involvement in social welfare despite large allocations for them. Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi raised concerns about the sight of children begging at traffic signals in Karachi, further highlighting child welfare issues.
Justice Ameenuddin Khan expressed disappointment over the international issue of Pakistani beggars being sent abroad, calling it an embarrassment for the country.
