November 16, 2001	Friday	Shaba'an 29, 1422

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window).

ISLAMABAD, Nov 15: The Supreme Court on Thursday issued non-bailable warrants for two accused, alleged to be Indian agents, who were awarded death sentence by an anti-terrorism court in Karachi on the charge of “waging war against Pakistan” but were acquitted by the Sindh High Court.

The three-member bench, comprising Chief Justice Irshad Hasan Khan, Justice Chaudhry Mohammad Arif and Justice Qazi Mohammad Farooq, after hearing the Advocate General Sindh, Raja Qureshi, ordered that Shafique alias Papu and Abdul Jabbar alias Zafar, should be rearrested and lodged in Central Prison Karachi till the conclusion of the appeals filed by the state against their acquittal.

According to prosecution case, the accused were arrested from a house in Gulistan-i-Jauhar on Oct 9, 2000. Arms and explosive substance were also seized from their residence.

During interrogation, they informed that they had brought the weapons and explosives from India through launches with the help of Haji Dongar. They also disclosed that they worked for RAW.

The ATC No.4, Karachi, convicted them under sections 4, 5,and 6 of Explosive Substances Act and Section 13D of Arms Ordinance and sentenced them to 14 years rigorous imprisonment. They were also convicted under sections 121, 121A, 122 and 123 PPC and awarded death and a fine of Rs50,000 each or one year simple imprisonment in case of default.

The respondents challenged their conviction and sentences before the Sindh High Court. The SHC rejected the prosecution evidence and the sentences were set aside.

Raja Qureshi, AG Sindh, argued that both the accused had made judicial confessions which were voluntary and true and were also collaborated in material particulars by the incriminating recoveries and slight delay in recording the same could not be blown out of proportion. The SC observed that in terrorism cases where accused person was prima facie employed by or worked for, or acted on instructions received from the enemy or attempted in a manner prejudicial to the integrity, security, or defence of Pakistan, it was the duty of the court to avoid hyper technicalities.

The bench observed that courts dealing with anti-terrorism cases had to bear in mind that the expeditious trial and its early conclusion was necessary for meeting the ends of justice and credibility of the judicial process.