Sarfaraz Shah case: SHC reserves judgment over appeal against convictions

Published May 30, 2013
Sarfraz Shah was murdered by Rangers personnel at Benazir Shaheed Park in Clifton on June 8, 2011. — File tv grab
Sarfraz Shah was murdered by Rangers personnel at Benazir Shaheed Park in Clifton on June 8, 2011. — File tv grab

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court reserved its judgment on Thursday over appeals filed by the accused Rangers personnel against their conviction in the Sarfaraz Shah murder case, DawnNews reported.

Sarfraz Shah was murdered by Rangers personnel at Benazir Shaheed Park in Clifton on June 8, 2011.

A division bench headed by Justice Sajjad Ali Shah heard the final arguments from the deputy prosecutor general who vehemently opposed the convicts’ appeals filed on Aug 25, 2011.

The bench reserved the pronouncement of the verdict to a date to be announced later by the court’s office.

An anti-terrorism court (ATC) headed by Bashir Ahmed Khoso had sentenced Rangers constable Shahid Zafar to death and jailed sub-inspector Bahaur Rehman, lance naik Liaquat Ali and constables Mohammad Tariq, Manthar Ali and Afzal Khan for life on Aug 12. The civilian contractor, Afsar Khan, was also jailed for life in the case.

The appellants, through their counsel, submitted that the ATC had no jurisdiction to try the case against the personnel of law-enforcement agencies.

They submitted that the prosecution did not rely upon the joint investigation teams report that was of the opinion that the act was not terrorism.

Appellants submitted that trial court used inadmissible evidence for convicting them as the impugned judgment was pronounced against them under the influence of a digital video recorder, produced by the prosecution which was against the law.

They requested the court to set aside the conviction as it was illegal and unlawful, and acquit the appellants of the charges.

Meanwhile, complainant Salik Shah, the elder brother of the deceased, had also filed plea urging the court for enhancement of penalty of convicts to death sentence. Later, brother of victim has withdrawn his application which requested the death penalty.

Opinion

Merging for what?

Merging for what?

The concern is that if the government is thinking of cutting costs through the merger, we might even lose the functionality levels we currently have.

Editorial

Dubai properties
Updated 16 May, 2024

Dubai properties

It is hoped that any investigation that is conducted will be fair and that no wrongdoing will be excused.
In good faith
16 May, 2024

In good faith

THE ‘P’ in PTI might as well stand for perplexing. After a constant yo-yoing around holding talks, the PTI has...
CTDs’ shortcomings
16 May, 2024

CTDs’ shortcomings

WHILE threats from terrorist groups need to be countered on the battlefield through military means, long-term ...
Reserved seats
Updated 15 May, 2024

Reserved seats

The ECP's decisions and actions clearly need to be reviewed in light of the country’s laws.
Secretive state
15 May, 2024

Secretive state

THERE is a fresh push by the state to stamp out all criticism by using the alibi of protecting national interests....
Plague of rape
15 May, 2024

Plague of rape

FLAWED narratives about women — from being weak and vulnerable to provocative and culpable — have led to...