Judical Action to end Bonded Labour - Human Rights Commission ...

Some representatives of the Press were present in the Court. They
have been directed not to publish the proceedings for the time being because
that might prejudice the result of these proceedings. However, they have
been assured that the final order would not be subject to this restriction, ,.
unless till then some such development takes place which compels the Court
to order otherwise.î
It was feared that perhaps the Police, in order to avoid the charges of illegal
intervention/detention and pressure at the behest of the owners, had resorted to registration
of a case and had also arrested some persons; and, the remaining were also thought to be
under some type of detention and were neither being arrested nor were they produced,
under the fear that they might divulge something against the owners and/or the Police. In
order to further know the nature of relationship between the labourers and their employers as
also the police connections, it was thought necessary to ensure the production of all the
persons who were allegedly accused persons though they appeared in reality to be bonded
labour. It may be stated here that by and large all those who were arrested were- being
released on bail either on the asking of the Police and/or by the owner or by the Magistrate
on the merits of the case. The proceedings were being held day to day in Chambers; several
hours daily, were devoted to this matter. The following three orders dated 16th of August,
17th of August and 21st of August, 1988 were passed after about a fortnight of the receipt of
the telegram, which would show the trend and purpose of the inquiry. Contemporaneously it
was being ensured that wherever somebody was being detained or coerced to render forced
labour, should be protected. The results were being achieved in geometrical progression.
ìORDER: (Dated 16-8-88)
Muhammad Ashraf, DSP, has submitted a report in writing. He appears to have
completely aligned with the bhatta owner- in this case Rana Abdul Qayum. He has not
mentioned anything about the accusation against the police about which he heard a lot in the
court proceedings.
The Additional Advocate-General Mr. Tanvir Ahmad stated .that the report by the
Advocate-General is under preparation and would be submitted soon. He has cited two
cases from Indian jurisdiction Neeraja Choudhary AIR 1984 SC 1099 (Para 2) and AIR 1982
SC 1473 in W.P. 8143 of 1981î.
Mr. Ahsanullah, who from appearance seems to be a respectable person, claiming to
be a journalist attached with a newspaper of Hyderabad and also the chief organizer of a
union constituted to help the Bhatta workers, has appeared today with his team; including
one Yaqoob an uneducated person described by Mr. Ahsanullah as his office secretarypresumeably
of the union. Rana Abdul Qayyum, the main actor in this entire episode has
also attended today. A Lawyer named Muhammad Arif, is present presumeably with a
watching brief from Rana Abdul Qayyum.
Mr. Najam, learned advocate representing the Bar Association with Mrs. Asma
Jahangir have also appeared. Mr. Najam has submitted his report in a folder with additional
four folders containing photostat copies of unarranged many documents, including
newspaper reports etc. which have not yet been perused on account of their bulk. Some
other members of the Bar are also present. Many other persons including the majority of
alleged detenus, their partisans and the employees of the bhatta owners are present. Due to
paucity of space, the proceedings could not be held in the chamber. They have been held in
the court hall.
Out of the remaining seven detenus, Ashraf has appeared. Yaqoob has also
appeared. He stated that Aslam is his son and that he is not in detention at the present. For
some unavoidable reason, Yaqoob has explained, Aslam has not been able to attend. With
--- 5 ---