From faryadi to citizen: How the Supreme Court challenged decades of than a culture

For decades, approaching a police station in Pakistan has often been associated with fear, delay and an unequal relationship

For decades, approaching a police station in Pakistan has often been associated with fear, delay and an unequal relationship between citizens and police officials. A person reporting a crime was commonly described as a “faryadi”, while applications were traditionally addressed in highly deferential language to the Station House Officer (SHO).

A recent Supreme Court order has challenged this culture by placing emphasis on timely FIR registration and greater accountability of police officials.

The order, issued by a bench comprising Justice Salahuddin Panhwar and Justice Hashim Khan Kakar in the Muhammad Bakhsh case, focuses particularly on delays in registering FIRs. The court has directed the Prosecutor General Sindh to provide records of murder and other heinous crime cases from January 1, 2025 onward, including the time of the incident, when police were informed and when the FIR was registered.

The purpose is to identify cases where registration was delayed beyond the legally required period and examine the reasons for such delays.

One significant aspect of the judgment is its discussion of language used in police correspondence. The court objected to expressions such as “Bakhidmat Janab Aali, Sahib Bahadur SHO Sahib” and emphasized the use of “Mr. SHO” instead.

The change may appear minor, but it reflects a broader principle: public officials exercise authority as part of state institutions and are accountable to the law rather than being treated as personal rulers.

The judgment also addresses the terminology used for a person reporting a crime. Instead of “faryadi”, the court referred to the statutory term “mukhbir”, or informant, in the context of Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

This distinction is important because reporting a cognizable offence is a legal process, not a personal favour sought from a police officer.

The court has further directed that the relevant record be examined and that copies of the order be circulated to the High Courts and Sessions Courts. The judgment is therefore significant beyond a single case because it raises a broader institutional question about how FIR registration is handled across the criminal justice system.

The order also refers to Section 201 of the Pakistan Penal Code in the context of causing disappearance of evidence or giving false information to screen an offender. Any criminal liability, however, would depend on the facts of an individual case and the requirements of the law.

For ordinary citizens, the practical importance of the judgment lies in reducing unnecessary delays between the occurrence of a crime, its reporting and formal registration. Families of victims should not have to repeatedly approach different police offices merely to have their complaint formally recorded.

The court has also ordered translation of its judgment into Sindhi, potentially making its contents more accessible to people who may not ordinarily understand legal proceedings in English.

However, the real test will be implementation. Court orders can establish legal standards, but meaningful change requires police departments, prosecutors and subordinate courts to follow those standards consistently.

The Supreme Court’s intervention therefore represents more than a discussion about terminology. It places citizen access to the criminal justice system, police accountability and timely FIR registration at the centre of the debate.

If implemented effectively, the directions could help reduce unnecessary litigation and the financial and emotional burden faced by complainants seeking registration of criminal cases.

The message is straightforward: reporting a crime should be treated as a legal right and responsibility within the criminal justice system, not as a personal favour granted by a police officer.

The court has spoken. The next question is whether the institutions responsible for implementation will ensure that the principle reaches the thana level.