KARACHI, Jan 21: The Anti-terrorism Court-3 on Tuesday sentenced a magazine editor and three dismissed policemen to 33 years in prison for hostage-taking and three other counts.

The ATC Judge, Arshad Noor Khan, also ordered confiscation of entire movable and immovable properties of the accused — Waseem Ansari, editor of the monthly Corruption Bainaqab, ASI Shahzad Baig and constables Mujahid Hussain and Jawaid Nazeer.

They were accused of blackmailing people after taking their nude pictures.

It is for the first time that any person initially charged with kidnapping for ransom has been convicted of ‘hostage-taking’ under section 7(e) of the Anti-terrorism Act.

All the four accused were arrested by the Gulzar-i-Hijri police in November last year along with three women during snap-checking in the area. One of the women, Fauzia, a resident of Buffer Zone, told police that she and two of her friends had been kidnapped from her residence for ransom. Her husband, Mohammed Jaffer, lodged an FIR after Gulzar-i-Hijri police handed over the accused, as well as Fauzia, to Buffer Zone police.

The complainant told police that his wife was a hosiery worker. On Nov 5, two of her colleagues, Shazia and Sadia, came to their house at around 5:30pm. Two hosiery contractors also joined in later.

He further stated that the accused, struck at their home in a car (B-6324) belonging to Wasim Ansari. They stripped one of the contractors and took his photographs. Mr Jaffer said that he, Fauzia, Shazia, Sadia, and both the contractors were then held hostage and made to board in two vehicles, Ansari’s car and a hired taxi.

He said that he was let off to arrange Rs50,000 to secure release of his wife and the two women whereas the contractors were released after being deprived of the amounts they possessed.

The special public prosecutor, Naimat Ali Randhawa, produced before the court as many as 107 nude photographs of men and women during his final arguments in the main case. In some of the pictures, ASI Shahzad and Wasim Ansari were seen stripping women themselves and one of the photographs showed the ASI in uniform.

The prosecution also produced before the court copies of three FIRs registered against the ASI at Baloch Colony, Buffer Zone and Gulzar-i-Hijri police stations for blackmailing the complainants who had accused him of taking nude pictures of their women family members.

In the verdict, the judge sentenced the four accused to a two-year term each under section 354 of the Pakistan Penal Code for assaulting women and outraging their modesty by forcibly taking their nude pictures. He also ordered them to pay a fine of Rs10,000 each and, in case of default, undergo another two-year rigorous imprisonment.

The accused were sentenced to one-year term with Rs1,000 fine each for wrongfully and illegally confining their victims. In case of default, they will have to undergo another three-month term on this count.

For committing robbery at the complainant’s home, the judge awarded the four accused a five year term and a fine of Rs20,000 each. They will have to suffer an additional three-month term in case of default on this count. The complainant had alleged that the accused had taken away a camera and a mobile phone set from his home.

At one stage during the trial, the prosecution suffered a set back when the prosecution witnesses, Jaffer and Fauzia, retracted their statements they had made before the police regarding the ransom demand.

The judge observed: “The evidence fully shows that the accused after taking the photographs took the complainant and the female witnesses from his house against their wishes and they also demanded ransom money from the witnesses for their release as deposed by the Shazia and Sadia, whereas Shazia, Jaffer and his wife have resiled from their such statement of demanding ransom money. But at least the forcible taking of these witnesses from the house by the accused has been deposed by all of them.”

He remarked: “In case, the offence regarding kidnapping for ransom provided under section 365-A, PPC, is not made out, even then there is a sufficient evidence available on record to hold the accused responsible for the offence of hostage-taking in view of section 7(e) of the ATA”.

The judge further observed: “The said evidence of all the witnesses has not been disproved in cross-examination. From such evidence it is apparent that the office of hostage-taking as provided under section 7(e) of the ATA is made out”.

BLAST CASE: The Anti-terrorism Court-2 Judge, Feroze Mehmood Bhatti, has adjourned to Thursday the hearing of a bomb blast case involving an activist of the banned Harkatul Mujahideen Aalmi.