May 28, 2003	Wednesday	Rabi-ul-Awwal 25,1424

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)

LAHORE, May 27: An anti-terrorism court on Tuesday acquitted Dr Ahmad Javed Khwaja and his brother Ahmad Naveed Khwaja of charges of firing on police and possessing illegal passports.

“When both the prosecution and defence versions are compared with each other, the latter appears to be more realistic and convincing to a man of ordinary prudence so as to the court, hence the acquittal,” read the operative part of the judgment delivered inside the Kot Lakhpat Jail.

The court, which had already granted bail to the accused in January, justified its judgment with the observation that “there were visible dents in the story of the prosecution resulting in its failure to prove the case”.

As ordered by the court, the bail bonds submitted by the accused earlier stood discharged following their acquittal.

The judge dictated the operative part of the judgment to the stenographer in the courtroom just before the commencement of proceedings at 12:55pm. The remaining part had already been written and was in the custody of the judge who signed the complete judgment in the courtroom.

The defence counsel, prosecutor and the accused were instructed to stay outside the courtroom during the dictation of the operative part of the judgment. Later on, the case was called and the court read out the operative part to both parties.

Both the Khwajas were chargesheeted by the court on April 12 under the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997 — Sections 7-b (opening indiscriminate fire on the police party) and 7-h (creating fear among the citizens and impeding the performance of official duty by the police officials) — with Section 13 of the Arms Ordinance 1965 (keeping illicit arms). Ahmad Naveed Khwaja was additionally chargesheeted under Section 6-g of the Passport Act 1974 (possessing illegal passports).

The court rejected the charges regarding the recovery of four passports of foreign nationals from Ahmad Naveed Khwaja. “Even if these charges are assumed to be correct, the accused did not commit any offence under the Passport Act 1974 since he did not use such passports for any personal benefit or for any other ulterior motive,” the court ruled.

The final arguments of defence counsel Pervez Inayat Malik were adopted in their entirety by the court ruling that none of the seven prosecution witnesses, all police officials, could testify with absolute conviction. As further pointed out by the court, there was a visible contradiction in the respective versions of the prosecution witnesses and in these circumstances the conviction of the accused would have been an abuse of norms of natural justice.

“The non-availability of independent witnesses also weakened the prosecution’s case as the testimony of the police officials could not be completely relied upon by the court,” the judgment read.

The court had refused to incorporate in the chargesheet the main allegation of harbouring Al Qaeda activists on the grounds that the prosecution did not produce the relevant incriminating evidence in the retiring room of the judge despite instructions.

The state had claimed privilege on the production of CDs and floppies allegedly recovered from the residence of the accused. The CDs and floppies allegedly contained matter to show their links with the Al Qaeda. However, such request was turned down by the court.

DETENTION: Despite their acquittal, the Khwajas were not released as they are still in preventive detention extended on March 29 under the Security of Pakistan Act 1952.

The state extended the detention through a order saying “they would be detained in Punjab till the next meeting of the review board scheduled for the month of May 2003”.

The defence counsel told Dawn that the detention would lapse not earlier than May 31 as suggested by the language of the detention order. “In case the two brothers are not produced before the review board for further extension in their detention by May 31, such detention would automatically become ineffective,” he said.