Institutional Failure: The Collapse of Accountability in the CDA Stray Dog Population Incident

This investigation focuses on case HRPM-MLORJ30M, involving criminal charges against Parishay Khan (identified in legal filings as Farzana Bashir) stemming from an incident at the CDA Stray Dog Population Control Centre. What appeared to be a localized dispute has escalated into a case study of institutional failure within the Islamabad administrative and judicial landscape, raising questions about the selective application of Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) sections.

Key Findings

Targeted Prosecution: On February 20, 2026, the submission of 'Challan U/S 173 Cr. P.C' against Farzana Bashir Marwart was processed. This report highlights how administrative friction with the Capital Development Authority (CDA) was converted into a criminal prosecution.

Procedural Velocity: The speed at which FIR 1626/25 was filed at Shahzad Town Police Station contrasts sharply with the delays often seen in human rights cases involving state actors, suggesting a potential abuse of the legal process to silence critics.

Transparency Concerns: The lack of transparency regarding the conditions at the CDA Stray Dog Population Control Centre serves as the backdrop for this confrontation, where advocates for animal welfare are met with criminal liability.

Evidence & Data

The prosecution's case, overseen by judicial authority in the District Courts (East) of Islamabad, centers on interactions between Farzana Bashir and the CDA. Our data shows that multiple hearings were scheduled for February 20, 2026, before Ahtsham Muqarrab. The use of Section 173 of the Cr. P.C. signals the formalization of the state's case, yet the underlying incident reveals a failure of the CDA to manage civil issues without resorting to criminal complaints. Social media documentation from users like SafinaKhann indicates that the case has wider implications for civic engagement in Islamabad.

Legal Framework

The case involves the application of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) and the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). However, the international context must not be ignored:

UDHR (Article 19): Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression. Targeting activists through criminal charges (FIR 1626/25) for documenting municipal failures is a violation of this fundamental right.

Constitution of Pakistan (Article 14): The dignity of man and, subject to law, the privacy of home, shall be inviolable. The criminalization of civic disputes infringes upon the dignity of the accused.

Recommendations

Mediation: The CDA should adopt mediation protocols for disputes involving civic volunteers rather than immediate criminalization via FIRs.

Judicial Oversight: The District Courts of Islamabad must scrutinize the 'Challan' to ensure that state machinery is not being used for vindictive purposes against Farzana Bashir.

Read the full case file on Parishay Khan vs CDA Islamabad (HRPM-MLORJ30M) on HRPM.