Low Graphics Site
White bar
Daily SectionMarker

Misc SectionMarker

Horoscope Recipes Weekly SectionMarker

Weekly SectionMarker

Pakistan's Internet Magazine
Herald
Dawn GroupMarker

Archive, Search, Feedback & HelpMarker

Dawn Classified



FrontPage National International Local Business KSE Forex Sports Editorial Opinion Letters Features Today's Cartoon TV Guide Cowasjee Ayaz Irfan Hussain Review Dawn Magazine Young World Images Dawn Group Subscription To Advertise

DINA
Previous Story DAWN - the Internet Edition Next Story


July 17, 2002 Wednesday Jamadi-ul-Awwal 6, 1423

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



Appeal seeking death for co-accused filed



By Our Reporter


KARACHI, July 16: The state on Tuesday filed an appeal seeking death penalty for the three accomplices of Ahmed Omer Saeed Sheikh, who were given life term for complicity in the kidnapping and murder of US journalist Daniel Pearl, by a judge of the anti-terrorism court at Hyderabad on Monday.

Advocate-General Sindh, Raja Qureshi, on the instructions of the government, filed the appeal in the Sindh High Court for enhancement of sentence.

After filing the appeal, Raja Qureshi told reporters that “overwhelming incriminating evidence has come on record” in respect of the three accused who have been awarded lesser punishment than what is prescribed by law being normal punishment.

It is the case of the state that the case set up by the prosecution against the four accused was and is based on conspiracy, in furtherance of which separate acts were committed by all the four accused with the common intention as well as the meeting of the minds, falling within the concept of criminal conspiracy.

He contended that “there is evidence which establishes criminal conspiracy, there is evidence to establish murder in furtherance of the said criminal conspiracy obtained through modern devices and is admissible under the provisions of Article 164 of the Qanoon-i-Shahadat”.

“It is the contention of the appellant that the trial judge ought not to have awarded a lessor sentence as it is the duty of an anti-terrorism court to appraise evidence strictly in accordance to the requirement prescribed by law without being swayed away emotionally for any other extraneous reason outside the pale of legal jurisdiction of appraisement of evidence.

“It is the claim of the state that there are no discrepancies in any manner in the case set up by the prosecution and the trial court was satisfied while awarding imprisonment for life to the three accused but has erred in not recording any reason in terms of extenuating circumstances which could operate as mandate from deviating to award the normal sentence prescribed by the law.”






Previous Story Top of Page Next Story

Seprater
Contributions
Privacy Policy
© DAWN Group of Newspapers, 2005