Serious gaps in police investigation and the resulting lack of evidence combined with poor prosecution have allowed the court of district and sessions judge, West, to acquit a factory owner and others in the case where the dumping of highly toxic industrial waste in an open area was alleged to have caused the deaths of two children in Site town. Handed down on March 26, the judgment chided the police for having made misdirected efforts "for its own reasons' and for failing to prosecute the case properly. Having found no positive incriminating evidence against the accused persons, said the judgment, the court's deciding officer found consensus between the defence and state representatives since even the district prosecutor argued in support of the acquittal plea. The judgment held the Site association and the owners of the plots where the toxic waste was dumped responsible for the tragedy and allowed the affected persons to sue these parties for damages. On May 4, 2006, 17 children between the ages of seven and ten years were seriously injured, allegedly by some toxic chemical which had been dumped in an open plot at Site town. They were taken to hospital and treated for their injuries but the lives of two of them could not be saved. The Sindh Environmental Protection Agency (Sepa) lodged a case (FIR No 181/06) at the Site police station under Sections 322, 337-H, 285 and 286 of the Pakistan Penal Code, as a result of which Farooq Gharib, Aslam Baig, Sher Khan, Salman and Abdul Rehman were indicted on Dec 8, 2007 for having dumped chemical industrial waste in the open plot which led to the deaths of two children and injuries sustained by 15 others. Although the court usually uses its own authority to ensure the presence of prosecution witnesses, the judgment handed down last month said that the prosecution had failed to produce any witnesses other than the complainant, the then director of Sepa Iqbal Saeed Khan and two prosecution witnesses, former deputy director Sepa Ashfaq Hussain and SI Waqar Khan. It said that the court had examined these individuals but the exercise had produced nothing of note. The judgment stated that the private advocate assisting the prosecution filed an application for adjournment on the grounds that some witnesses had been out of town while others were absent. At this stage, said the judgment, the defence counsel pointed out that an acquittal application under Section 265-K of the Criminal Procedure Code