March 26, 2003	Wednesday	Muharram 22, 1424

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

RAWALPINDI, March 25: Additional District and Sessions Judge Syed Pervez Ali Shah on Tuesday accepted bail plea of Aqeel Ahmed Abdul Qudoos, who was arrested on March 1 for allegedly harbouring suspected Al Qaeda leader Khalid Shaikh Mohammad and his Somali aide.

The judge granted the bail after hearing arguments of the prosecution and defence councils. However, Mr Qudoos could not be released as his family failed to submit Rs100,000 surety bond with the court because the verdict came after the banking hours.

He would be released on Wednesday.

The defence council, comprising Sardar Ishaq and Qausain Faisal, during arguments challenged the March 19 decision by Judicial Magistrate Mohammad Iqbal Guraya, wherein he had rejected a bail application of the accused for harbouring suspected Al Qaeda terrorists, scuffling with policemen and possessing weapons and explosives.

Citing reports from the national dailies, the defence council contended that the Westridge police had fabricated the allegations in the FIR against the accused in a systematic way just to hide their own illegal action.

He contended that the police had picked up the accused on March 1, while the FIR was registered on March 4, which invited doubts about the allegations of the police.

The defence council maintained that according to section 103 of the CrPC, it was mandatory for police to present at least two public witnesses against the accused to justify their charges, but not a single witness was produced in the case.

The council challenged the police claims about the arrest of Mr Shaikh Mohammad and his Somali aide from the Westridge resident of the accused by contending that the suspected Al Qaeda leader was arrested from Quetta four days prior to the first raid on Qudoos’ house.

It maintained that on March 17, the Judge of Anti-Terrorism Court II, Safdar Hussain Malik, had ruled out the application of section 7 of the ATA, 2002, on the case as the accused had not committed any crime which came in the jurisdiction of terrorism. While, the rest of the accusations including section 353 and 216 of the PPC, sub-section 13 of section 20 of the Arms Ordinance, 1965, and sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Act, were bailable as there could not be awarded death sentence or life imprisonment to the accused.

The defence council also termed the arguments of the prosecution as “stereotyped” and without substantial evidences.

Meanwhile, talking to Dawn, the family members of the accused including his wife, Farzana, and mother Mahe Leka, who were also present in the court, said that Mr Qudoos was innocent.