Low Graphics Site
White bar
.: Latest News :. .: News in Pictures :.
Dawn e-paper
Daily SectionMarker

Misc SectionMarker

Weekly SectionMarker

Weekly SectionMarker



Pakistan's Internet Magazine
Herald
Dawn GroupMarker

Archive, Search, Feedback & HelpMarker

Weather

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

DINA
Previous Story DAWN - the Internet Edition Next Story

September 27, 2007 Thursday Ramazan 14, 1428





KARACHI : Judgment in trader’s kidnap case on 28th



By A Reporter


KARACHI, Sept 26: Judge Abdul Ghafoor Memon of ATC-II, after hearing the arguments of both the defence and state’s counsel in the kidnapping for ransom case of Haji Abdul Ghaffar, a chicken dealer, on Wednesday fixed Sept 28 for the pronouncement of his order in the case.

The defence counsel said that the case was baseless and his clients were innocent, noting that there was an inconsistency in the police version.

Special Public Prosecutor Niamat Ali Randhawa argued that the depositions of the eyewitness and that of the kidnap victim were enough for awarding punishment to the accused.

The court had recorded the statements of defence witnesses Abdur Rehman, Noman and Mohammad Ishaq Soomro.

In their statements the witnesses said that the accused were arrested on June 6, while the police had shown the arrest on June 14, 2007, which, they said, was incorrect.

The kidnap victim was sitting in his shop located in Hussainabad when armed men took him away in the limits of the Azizabad police station on May 7, 2007.

The court had also recorded the statements of three defence witnesses — Imran, Shahid and Sarwar — on Sept 22.

They said that the accused were arrested from their residence whereas the police had shown the arrest from Tariq Road which, they said, was untrue.

Niamat Ali Randhawa, in the cross-examination of the accused, said that the defence counsel had failed to produce any solid proof before the court which could prove the innocence of the accused.






Previous Story Top of Page Next Story

Seprater
Contributions
Privacy Policy
© DAWN Group of Newspapers, 2007