Punjab to modernize Civil Defence with Rs500m equipment

    The family of a young man who was killed in an alleged police encounter in the Kadhan area on the outskirts of Badin has raised serious objections to his post-mortem report, alleging that the report does not accurately reflect the condition of his body. The relatives of the deceased, identified as Moharram Dil, have declared the post-mortem report to be fake and demanded that his grave be exhumed so that a fresh post-mortem examination can be conducted. The family has called for an impartial investigation into the circumstances surrounding his death and the preparation of the medical report. Moharram Dil’s father said that there were no visible signs on his son’s body indicating that it had been cut open for a post-mortem examination. He said that when the body was being washed before burial, the family observed gunshot wounds but did not see any other marks that would suggest that a post-mortem had been performed. The father said that the family also possesses video recordings of his son’s body taken before the burial. According to him, these videos could provide important evidence regarding the condition of the body and may help determine whether the post-mortem examination described in the official report actually took place. The controversy has emerged over the timing and circumstances of the post-mortem report. Moharram Dil was reportedly killed in an alleged police encounter on July 26, while his post-mortem report was issued five days later, on July 31, by the Rural Health Centre. The family has questioned the circumstances under which the examination was conducted and how the report was prepared. Their demand for exhumation is aimed at obtaining a new medical examination that could independently establish the cause and circumstances of the young man’s death. Badin District Health Officer (DHO) has provided an explanation regarding who can conduct a post-mortem examination. According to the DHO, if a medico-legal officer is not available, the medical superintendent or a senior duty doctor can perform the post-mortem. The clarification comes amid questions raised by the family regarding the validity of the medical report. The authorities may now face pressure to determine whether the procedure was conducted according to the relevant medical and legal requirements. Police, meanwhile, maintain that Moharram Dil was a drug dealer who was killed during a police encounter on July 26. According to the police version, an exchange of fire took place between the police and the alleged drug dealer, during which Moharram Dil was killed. Police also claimed that two officers were injured during the encounter. The law enforcement authorities have presented the incident as an armed confrontation, while the deceased’s family has challenged the official account and raised doubts about the circumstances surrounding his death. The conflicting accounts have increased calls for an independent investigation. The family believes that a fresh post-mortem could help establish whether the injuries on the body correspond with the police account and whether the original medical report was prepared accurately. The demand for exhumation and a second post-mortem is now at the centre of the controversy. The videos reportedly recorded before the burial could also become relevant if an investigation is launched. The case has raised broader questions about transparency in alleged police encounters and the importance of properly documented medico-legal procedures. A fresh examination, if authorized, could provide additional evidence and help address the concerns raised by the deceased’s family.

The Supreme Court of Pakistan has scheduled hearings in cases concerning meetings with former Prime Minister and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan, as well as matters related to his medical treatment. According to details, the cases will be heard on August 18 by a three-member bench of the Supreme Court. The bench will be headed by Justice Shahid Waheed and will include Justice Naeem Afghan and Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim. The Supreme Court Registrar’s Office has issued notices to the relevant parties and their lawyers regarding the upcoming hearing. The scheduling of the cases comes amid continued attention surrounding issues related to access to Imran Khan, including meetings with party leaders, lawyers and other relevant individuals. His medical treatment and healthcare arrangements have also remained an important issue in proceedings concerning his detention. The upcoming hearing is expected to bring the relevant legal arguments before the three-member bench. The court will consider the petitions and submissions presented by the concerned parties and their legal representatives. The development is significant for PTI supporters and political circles because questions surrounding meetings with Imran Khan have remained a recurring issue. Any observations or directions issued by the Supreme Court during the hearing could attract considerable political and legal attention. The registrar’s office has formally notified the concerned lawyers, meaning the matter is now set for proceedings before the apex court on August 18. Further developments are expected after the hearing, when the Supreme Court may issue directions or pass orders concerning the matters before it. For now, the key development is that the Imran Khan meeting and treatment cases have officially been fixed for hearing before a three-member Supreme Court bench. The hearing on August 18 will therefore be closely watched, particularly by PTI supporters and legal observers following matters related to Imran Khan’s access to meetings and medical care.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani met with Jewish religious leaders at City Hall as rabbis raised concerns about his public criticism of Israel and its potential impact on Jewish New Yorkers. The closed-door meeting brought together 10 rabbis representing Reform, Conservative, Reconstructionist and Orthodox Jewish communities. It was organized by the Mayor’s Office to Combat Antisemitism as part of efforts to strengthen communication with Jewish communities and address concerns about safety and antisemitism. Several participants urged Mamdani to reconsider the tone and frequency of his comments about Israel. They argued that his criticism of the Israeli government could contribute to feelings of insecurity among Jewish residents, particularly amid continuing concerns about anti-Jewish hate in New York City. Rabbi Rick Jacobs, president of the Union for Reform Judaism, spoke directly to the mayor during the discussion. Jacobs said he was willing to work with Mamdani’s administration but argued that the mayor’s repeated criticism of Israel was causing harm. The conversation was reportedly candid but respectful, with participants also discussing practical concerns affecting Jewish communities across the city. Rabbi Rachel Timoner said Mamdani listened carefully and responded with care during the meeting. Rabbi Jon Leener, meanwhile, encouraged City Hall to focus on issues such as security around synagogues rather than making unnecessary comments about the Israel-related conflict. The meeting comes as Mamdani’s administration continues to emphasize its commitment to combating antisemitism. The mayor appointed Phylisa Wisdom to lead the Mayor’s Office to Combat Antisemitism in February, describing Jewish safety, respect and belonging as priorities for his administration. Mamdani has repeatedly distinguished between criticism of Israel’s government and antisemitism. During a May news conference, he said his administration had a responsibility to keep Jewish New Yorkers safe while maintaining his position on Israeli government policies. He also said criticism of a government should not be confused with hatred toward people of a particular faith. City Hall has also highlighted its broader efforts to address anti-Jewish hate, including increased funding for hate-crime prevention and security initiatives. The administration has said its approach should go beyond responding to incidents and focus on preventing antisemitism. The latest City Hall meeting reflects the continuing challenge facing Mamdani as he attempts to maintain dialogue with New York’s diverse Jewish communities while remaining outspoken about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. For the rabbis involved, the central issue remains Jewish safety and the atmosphere in New York City. For the mayor, the meeting provides another opportunity to demonstrate that political disagreements over Israel can coexist with his stated commitment to protecting and supporting Jewish New Yorkers.