ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has a word of advice for the courts of law: do not get distracted while dealing with terrorismrelated cases, especially when the investigation or inquiry carried out by police is neither satisfactory nor free from malice.

`[It is] true that the country is confronted with formidable terrorist activities from one end to [the] other, so much so [that] twice the armed forces were called in aid of the civil administration/government to suppress this grave mischief,` Justice Dost Mohammad Khan wrote in a six-page judgement.

No doubt that thousands of army officers, soldiers as well as personnel from other law enforcing agencies had suffered casualties and the public was the major victim whenever public and private property was damaged by explosive substances, whether planted or through suicide attacks, the verdict regretted.

`But this should not, in any manner, distract the court of law from doing justice, observed Justice Khan, a member of the twojudge Supreme Court bench headed by Justice Mushir Alam.

The bench had taken up an appeal filed by Mohammad Noman against a Nov 2, 2016 order of the Bahawalpur bench of the Lahore High Court, which had rejected his bail plea.

Accepting the appeal, the Supreme Court granted bail to Noman, subject to furnishing of bonds worth Rs200,000 with two personal surety bonds of a similar amount, to the satisfaction of the trial court.

In his complaint, Bahawalpur Counter Terrorism Department Assistant SubInspector Noor Hassan had alleged that during a raid near the Bahawalpur Toll Plaza, he received a tip from an informer that five persons carrying handbags, who appeared to bemilitants, were proceeding towards the Railway Bridge over the River Sutlej.

Consequently, a police raiding party spotted the gang near the Railway Bridge but the men fled. They were eventually arrested, and the petitioner was one of them.

Police claimed that they recovered one handbag each, containing explosive substances, time bombs, arms and ammunition and some literature. Each bag was inscribed with the slogan, `Allah-o-Akbar.

But the accused`s brother, Mohammad Salman Arif, claimed that on the night between April,3 and 4, 20 to 25 individuals in black uniforms entered their house in New Muslim Town, Lahore, without any lawful authority and took away the petitioner along with his cell phones and three licensed guns, an ATM Card and cash.

Mr Arif immediately called the police at lam, which reached after one and a half hours and entered his application in the daily diary under Serial No. 564 on the same date, the judgement said.

The brother claimed that the petitioner was a businessman and a tax-payer and had never been reported to be a militant himself, nor was he in any way linked to any militant group, nor was he a facilitator. Advocate Azam Nazeer Tarar, representing the petitioner before the apex court, argued that a habeas corpus petition was filed before a local justice of peace after some delay.

He explained that the petitioner`s family had been searching for him and had made several complaints/applications to different authorities, but no inquiry or investigation was conducted into his abduction, a fact also conceded by the Muslim Town station house of ficer before the apex court. In such a situation, the judgement said, citizens cannot be left at the mercy of the police`s traditional chicanery, which is not authorised by the law.

While dealing with the liberty of the citizen at bail stage or otherwise, the courts are required to exercise extra care and caution so that actual terrorists and militants who challenge the writ of the state may not go scot free; nor should innocent citizens be grilled, put behind bars or painted as terrorists, Justice Khan observed.