You are on page 1of 8



Writ Petition No: 2106 / 2015

Mumtaz Anwar Abbasi, father of Detenu Hammad Dadan resident of DD3
Gulshan Dadan Khan, Rawalpindi

.. Petitioner



Station House Officer, Police Station I-9, Islamabad


Inspector General of Police, Islamabad Capital Territory, Islamabad


Ministry of Defence through its Secretary, Islamabad


Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate, through its Director General,



Ministry of Interior through its Secretary, Islamabad



Respectfully Sheweth:




That the Petitioner is a citizen of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and holder
of Computerized National Identity Card No. 37405-7270354-1. He is a
resident of Gulshan Dadan Khan, a neighborhood in Rawalpindi established
by the Petitioners grandfather. He hails from one of the most respectable
families in the region. He earns his living through various businesses
including CNG supply and has lived more than five decades of his life as law-
abiding citizen. The Petitioner has 3 children, among whom is the 26-year-old
son, Hammad Dadan, Advocate.

Advocate Hammad Dadan (hereinafter referred as detenu) was born and
raised in the Islamabad-Rawalpindi region. He did his O Levels from
Beaconhouse School System, Margalla Campus and his A Levels from




HeadStart School, Islamabad. Being a bright and hardworking student

Hammad went on to study law at the University of Sussex, UK from where he
graduated with an LLB (Hons.). Having completed his studies, he returned to
Pakistan because he was passionate about contributing to dispensation of
justice in his country. He enrolled as an Advocate with the Punjab Bar Council
in 2014 and became a member of the Islamabad Bar Association. Hammad
started practicing law and since November, 2014, Hammad was working as
an Associate Lawyer in the renowned law firm of Khan & Muezzin, where he
was flourishing both as a person and as a professional.

That on the evening of June 20, 2015, which was the second day of the holy
month of Ramzan, Hammad decided to attend the Tarawih prayer at Masjid
Imam Abu Daud, opposite Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS),
Islamabad. When the Petitioner asked Hammad about why he was going to
this particular masjid and not the neighborhood masjid, Hammad explained
that he was going there because he enjoyed listening to the Quranic
recitation in Masjid Abu Daud which he finds more melodious than that of
other masajids.

That around 9 p.m, Hammad, the detenue left his home situated at DD3
Gulshan-e-Dadan and was driving his car Mira bearing vehicle registration
number DW 282 ICT. On his way to the masjid, Hammad picked up 3 other
young friends who also wanted to attend Tarawih at Masjid Abu Daud.
These included: Ammar Dadan s/o Raja Javed, Abdullah Umar s/o Col. (r)
Khalid Mahmud Abassi; and Ahmad s/o Haji Bashir. Ammar Dadan, around
28 years old, is a second cousin of Hammads. Ammar also did his schooling
at Beaconhouse School Margalla Campus after which he attended the Bahria
University Islamabad from where he graduated with a Bachelor of Business
Administration (BBA), after which he set up a real estate business. He lived in
the house next to the Petitioners i.e. DD4, Gulshan-e-Dadan. Abdullah
Umar, around 26 years old, was also schooled in the Army Public School. He
is presently a second year law student at the International Islamic University,
Islamabad and has permanent residence at House 33, Street 19, 1-9/4.
Hammad also gave a ride to Ahmad Bashir s/o Haji Basir, a teenager, who is
his friend. The four boys attended tarawih together on the night of 20th June
That at or about 11 pm, the Petitioner received a call on his mobile phone
having number 0300 9563986 from Hammads mobile phone having number
0336 999 7702. He seemed in a state of shook and spoke only briefly. He said
Father, my car had been hit. We are near Beaconhouse. Please come to
help us. The Petitioner assured him that he was coming to help and
immediately rushed out and drove towards Beaconhouse Margalla Campus,
situated in H-8, near Shifa Hospital.


That when the Petitioner reached Beaconhouse around 11:30pm on

20.06.2015, he found out that Hammads car, Mira bearing registration No.
DW 282 ICT, was standing on the road. Hammad was nowhere to be found in
the car. Instead, the car was surrounded by a large number of by-standers
who were gathered over there. Behind Hammads car was another car, a
Toyota Vigo, which has been left half upturned and was now being lifted up
by a crane.

7. That Ahmad Bashir, the teenager friend of Hammad and the assembled
people at the spot, which included a number of policemen, informed the
Petitioner that Hammad, Ammar and Abdullah have been abducted by
armed personal belonging to Inter-Service Intelligence, Respondent No. 4.
The Petitioner was informed that a Vigo and a number of other vehicles
owned by Respondent No. 1 started chasing the car of detenus when they
left Masjid Daud after the tarawih. When the detenus tried to loose their
chasers, the Vigo owned by the chasers actually hit the detenus car from
behind and in the process their own Vigo turned upside down.

8. That once both the car of the detenus and the cars of the chasers got stuck,
the chasers came out. They were armed men dressed in plain clothes. First
they dragged out Abdullah who was sitting in the front passenger seat.
Hammad protested by informing them that he was an Advocate but
undaunted by this, they also abducted him and put him in a separate car.
Finally, they dragged Ammar out of the car and abducted him as well.

9. That the Petitioner inquired from the people gathered on the spot about
whose car the stranded Vigo was? The people gathered there and, in
particular, an Officer of the nearby Police Station, Sub-Inspector Akram
Cheema, informed the Petitioner that the stranded Vigo belong to the Inter
Services Intelligence (ISI) Respondent No. 4 and that it would be prudent to
not inquire any further into the matter.

10. That the Petitioner, being extremely anxious about the life and well-being of
his son and his sons cousins and friends, immediately made inquiries with
the hospitals of the city including Shifa Hospital and PIMS. No hospital had
any news about their whereabouts.

11. That the Petitioner then went along with Col. (R) Khalid Abbassi, father of
detenu Abdullah went to I-9 Police Station where, around 1:30 am they
submitted a hand-written application for registration of FIR nominating
unnamed men of ISI, Respondent No. 2. Duty Officer SI Akram Cheema
informed the Petitioners that, on the basis of his site visit, he shared their
suspicion that this was a case of Enforced Disappearance carried out at the
behest of Respondent No. 4. However, since Respondent No. 4 is generally
known to operate beyond the boundaries of the laws and the Constitution of
the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, therefore FIR could not be registered

against them. Instead of registering an FIR against the real culprits,

Respondent police offered to register an FIR against na maloom afraad.
The Petitioner refused lying in the FIR and requested the daily diary number
and copy of his application so that he could seek all possible remedies under
the law. The Duty Officer refused to give the Plaintiff a copy of his
application for registration of FIR, making the excuse that the photocopier in
the Police Station was broken and a copy couldnt be made till the next

12. That the detenu Hammad Advocate was a law-abiding citizen of Pakistan and
is entitled to the protection of the laws of the Islamic Republic. It is worth
mentioning that the detenus had never been charged with any specific
offence, nor had they ever been notified of any pending or contemplated
charges against them in any jurisdiction in connection therewith they might
be said to have been arrested.

13. That the Petitioner has also gotten in touch with the detenus professional
community, the Islamabad Bar Association. The legal community has
expressed shock and deep concern about this incident. If the defenders of
the law themselves are subject to such arbitrary treatment at the hand of
state institutions, then what justice can an ordinary citizen possibly expect?

14. That the Petitioner has come knocking at the doors of this Court as a means
of last resort. However, if even this Court cannot seek the release of
Hammad Advocate and his fellow detenus and cannot bring his tormentors
to task, then the last flame of hope for a constitutionally governed Pakistan
will be extinguished.

15. That under the circumstances given above, the following questions arise
pertaining to the enforcement of various fundamental rights and protections
available to every citizen of Pakistan in terms of the Constitution of the
Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973:

(A) Whether the abduction of a citizen without any lawful excuse is not
infringement of the right to life, liberty and security bestowed upon by
virtues of Article 9 of the Constitution?

(B) Whether the unlawful and arbitrary arrest of a person in a disgraceful
way is not in violation of the right to a fair trial and due process of law
and hence unfair, unjust and unreasonable?

(C) Whether the arbitrary deprivation of liberty of a person about whom
its not even ascertainable in what conditions he is being kept is not in
violation of Article 25 of the Constitution which enjoins upon the state
to ensure equality of citizens and; is any arbitrary action taken against

an individual not in contravention to the principles of equality and non-


(D) Whether the unlawful and unjustified deprivation of an individual,
against his will and making him presumably suffer through physical and
psychological trauma as well as the mental pain inflicted to his family
not in violation to Article 14 of the Constitution, and therefore likely to
be redressed by this Honorable Court?

16. That in light of the submissions hereinabove, being aggrieved by the
unlawful actions of the respondents and their law-enforcement
agencies/agents, the petitioner invokes the Constitutional jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court on the following grounds:


i. That the detenus have been taken away without any legal justification
and in an unlawful manner. Further, the way the detenus have been or
are being treated with is in utter violation of his constitutional right to
be dealt with in accordance with the law laid in Article 4 read with
Article 9 of the Constitution of Pakistan as both the Articles postulate
that no person can ever be deprived of life or liberty without going
through the due process of law, if so required. Article 4 of the
Constitution states as no action detrimental to the life, liberty, body,
reputation or property of any person shall be taken except in
accordance with law, whereas the article 9 reads that no person shall
be deprived of life or liberty save in accordance with law.

ii. That the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973
categorically and unequivocally guarantees that no one would be
punished in this country but for a violation of a specific provision of
law, rule or regulation and that too should not be in defiance of the
requirements of law and the Constitution.

iii. That the detenus have been picked up by the officials of agencies
without telling them or their family any reason for so doing; further the
abductors did not bother to produce the detenus before any Court of
law for getting such long detention legalized as required by the law. It is
averred that such abduction and subsequent detention/confinement of
the detenus is a clear infringement upon the Fundamental Rights of the
detenus enshrined under Article 10 of the Constitution of Pakistan
which reads as (1) no person who is arrested shall be detained in
custody without being informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for
such arrest, nor shall he be denied the right to consult and be
defended by a legal practitioner of his own choice. (2) every person
who is arrested and detained in custody shall be produced before a

Magistrate within a period of twenty-four hours of such arrest,

excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest
to the Court of the nearest Magistrate, and no such person shall be
detained in custody beyond the said period without the authority of a
iv. That Article 10 of the Constitution provides direct protection to people
from enforced disappearance. Enforced disappearance of persons is
considered to be a crime against humanity all over the world in view of
Article 1 of United Nations General Assembly Declaration on the
Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances, 1992 and
Article 5 of International Convention for the Protection of All Persons
from Enforced Disappearance (ICCPED), 2006. Missing persons cannot
be detained illegally by government agencies, there must be some
legislation in the country to control unauthorized detention of persons.
(PLD 2014 SC 305)

v. That the Honorable Lahore High Court in Abdul Rasheed Bhatti v.
Government of Punjab (PLD 2010 Lahore 468), in case of illegal
detention, has held that the liberty of every citizen is to be protected
and guaranteed under Articles 4, 9, 10 and 15 of the Constitution of the
Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, and the State has to jealously
safeguard liberty of every citizen wherever he may be; and any action
without sufficient cause depriving or restricting liberty of a citizen is not
envisaged by the Constitution of the country and any such action taken
by the Government or any of its functionary is not immune from
scrutiny of High Court in exercise of its power under Article 199 of the

vi. That the fundamental rights of everybody under Article 9, 10, 14 and 25
to be read with Article 4 of the Constitution has to be respected. If any
person committed an offence, he should be dealt with in accordance
with law and the concerned agencies only. If the Government officials of
any department or organization would take law into their own hands,
powerful individuals would not be prevented from doing the same.
Everything is needed to be done within the system and strictly in
accordance with the law. (2005 PLD 700 Lah.)

vii. That based on the facts alleged above, the Respondents and/or their
agencies, directly or indirectly, took part in the kidnapping/abduction of
the detenus, which exposes them to potential criminal penalty under
the Pakistan Penal Code.

viii. That the Respondents have a legal duty to bar commission of such
crimes within the territorial sovereignty of Pakistan and to prosecute
those who take part in such crimes.

ix. That there is no other alternate and efficacious remedy available to the
Petitioner but to invoke the constitutional jurisdiction of this
Honourable Court.


In view of the foregoing facts and circumstances it is most respectfully prayed
that this Honourable Court may be pleased to:

a) issue a writ in the nature of habeas corpus to the Respondents directing them
to immediately produce the detenus before this Honorable Court;

b) provide redress for the criminal offences committed by the Respondents
against the detenus by directing the relevant authorities that criminal charges,
under the relevant laws of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan be registered
against those responsible for the abduction and subsequent detention of the

c) Any other relief that this Honourable Court deems fit may also kindly be



Advocate High Court Barrister-at-Law
Advocate High Court

Advocate High Court


Certified that the subject matter has never been directly or substantially
adjudicated upon by any court of Law; and this is the first Writ Petition filed on
the aforementioned subject.



Writ Petition No: _____/2015
Mumtaz Anwar Abbasi versus SHO, P.S. I-9 and others


I, Mumtaz Anwar Abbasi S/O M. Anwar Abbasi, do hereby solemnly swear and
affirm that the contents of my accompanying Writ Petition are all true and correct
according to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing has been
concealed from this Honourable Court.


Verified on oath at Islamabad on this ________ day of June, 2015 that the
contents of my above affidavit are all true and correct according to the best of my
knowledge and belief and that nothing has been concealed from the Court.