LAHORE: The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Monday strongly condemned Kasur police for their involvement in a viral video that showed detained boys and girls, some with shaved heads, being publicly humiliated. Justice Ali Zia Bajwa, hearing a contempt petition related to the incident, demanded an explanation from the police about the legal basis for such actions and the circulation of the video on official social media accounts.
The court questioned under what law the suspects were subjected to this treatment, highlighting the disturbing nature of the footage, which also contained scenes mixed with clips from an Indian film. “What law permits the police to treat individuals this way?” Justice Bajwa remarked sharply. “Is there any law left in this country?”
Kasur’s District Police Officer (DPO) appeared before the court and informed the bench that the officer responsible for recording the video had been suspended, and cases under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) were filed against those who shared the video online. The DPO also stated that a recommendation had been made to dismiss the Station House Officer (SHO) involved, citing alleged collusion with the owner of a farmhouse where the incident occurred. The farmhouse owner remains at large.
The court further questioned why the farmhouse owner had not been apprehended and sought clarification on what had been recovered from the property. The DPO confirmed that liquor bottles were found at the site, with the Punjab prosecutor general noting that immoral activities were common at the location.
Justice Bajwa condemned the public shaming of the suspects, stating, “If someone has committed a crime, proceed with legal action — why publicise their actions?” He also summoned the Deputy Inspector General (DIG) and Punjab’s advocate general for the next hearing, directing the advocate general to clarify if any law allows such public exposure of suspects in custody.
The court issued contempt of court notices to the investigating officer (IO), a constable, and the SHO involved, questioning why they should not face jail time for violating court orders.
