PESHAWAR: A Peshawar High Court larger bench on Friday issued notices to the attorney general for Pakistan and interior secretary, directing them to produce five relatives, who have allegedly been in the illegal custody of lawenforcement agencies in connection with the `disappearance` of an Omani woman.

Justice Ijaz Anwar, Justice Syed Arshad Ali and Justice Sahibzada Asadullah also referred the matter to the chief justice for forming a full court, observing that a very important matter related to dignity of citizens is involved in the case.

They also directed the provincial inspector general of police to ensure production of the five detainees in the court during the next hearing on May 5.

The bench also declared that petitioner Abdul Haleem and his other family members should not be harassed in any manner by law-enforcement agencies.Advocates Aminur Rehman Yousafzai and Mohammad Yaseen Hassankhelvi represented the petitioner, whereas advocate general Shah Faisal Uthmankhel and additional advocate general Adnan Ali appeared for the provincial government.

Besides additional attorney general Sanaullah Khan, Peshawar Capital City Police Officer Mohammad Qasim Khan, DSP (legal) Mohammad Inam Khan, Inspector (Legal) Nasrullah Khan, SHO of Hayatabad police station Tariq Khan and additional assistant commissioner (litigation) Sidra Ahmad also turned up.

The petitioner claimed that five of his close relatives, including Abdullah, Zohaib, Haris, Mohammad Haider and Aziz Shah, were taken away by police from their residence in Hayatabad area of Peshawar a few days ago and their whereabouts had not been known since then.

Pursuing the court`s earlier orders, the CCPO, along with other police officers, submitted an interim report, which claimed that an Omani woman, Safiya, landed at Lahore`s Allama Iqbal International Airport on April 19, 2025, before she was picked up by Mohammad Onais.

It added that since then, the woman had been missing, while suspect Onais and his mother, Muslim Bibi, were at large.In the report, the police claimed that during the search for Safiya, passport and other documents along with some other her goods were recovered from the room of the petitioner.

They added that the five persons were arrested as a preventive measure under sections 107 and 151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and a challan (charge sheet) was submitted to the court of a judicial magistrate.

The magistrate ordered their release after obtaining bail bonds from them.

The police insisted that they`re unaware of the five people`s whereabouts.

The bench expressed dissatisfaction with the report, observing that the said `story` had already been narrated to the court during the last hearing on April 30.

`The issue that the police are investigating and trying to recover Safiya is not before us. It is for the police to make all efforts to recover Safiya but within the four corners of law,` it observed.

The bench wondered how suspects could be picked up in such a manner without registration of any FIR.

It ordered the CCPO to ensure, `Whatever was the position, whether the detainees were involved in a criminal case or otherwise, they should be produced before the court to ensure that they were in lawful custody and being treated in accordance with law.However, when the matter was again taken up afterward, the AG and police officials produced the passport and other documents, which allegedly belonged to Safiya, and were allegedly recovered from the petitioner`s residence, An interesting situation emerged when a senior lawyer and former president of PHC Bar Association, Fida Gul, said he had spoken to some officials of the law-enforcement agencies, who insisted that if the petitioner withdrew the petition, the detainees would be freed.

`This statement or offer is not acceptable to the court and we hereby reaffirm that this court has no personalinterest in the matter rather this court, being custodian of the fundamental rights of the parties would ensure that they are treated in accordance with law even if they are involved in any criminal case, the bench observed.

It added that its concern was that under the legal system, it was only the police or for that matter the Federal Investigation Agency to investigate and inquire into such cases and if any person or his accomplice was involved in any criminal case, he might be arrested.

However, after his arrest, he has to be producedbefore the courtifhiscustody is required in the matter, according to it.