• Bench acquits four appellants from terrorism charge; commutes life term awarded in 2024 into time served • Court asks IGP to find out what ‘compelled police to conduct a weak investigation in this very high-profile case’

KARACHI: While commuting the life term of four appellants into the period they have already undergone in jail, the Sindh High Court on Tuesday ruled that the targeted killing of former Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Pakistan MNA Ali Raza Abidi did not fall within the definition of terrorism.

A two-judge bench headed by Justice Omar Sial passed this order while hearing appeals of convicts Muhammad Farooq, Muhammad Ghazali, Abu Bakar and Abdul Haseeb against their life term by an anti-terrorism court.

In April 2024, the ATC had sentenced them to life in prison for facilitating absconding accused in the killing of the MQM-P leader in December 2018 outside his Defence Housing Authority home.

The bench acquitted the appellants from the charge of terrorism and the life term awarded under the Pakistan Penal Code by the ATC was commuted to the period they have already served.

In its verdict, the bench stated that the appellants were convicted for the offence of terrorism, but no cogent evidence was produced at the trial court to show that there was an intent or design to coerce and intimidate public or create a sense of fear or insecurity in society.

It said that this was a case of targeted killing, but the motive for which was never discovered by the investigators.

It said only evidence against the appellants was their “extrajudicial confessions” recorded by police in the presence of the complainant and call date record (CDR).

It noted that alleged confessions were inadmissible in evidence as admittedly, none of the confessions was made before a judicial magistrate while there were indications of “unlawful force” having been used in their arrests and subsequent detention.

“An extra-judicial confession is a weak piece of evidence and it must be corroborated and supported before it can form a part of admissible evidence,” the bench remarked.

Regarding CDR, the bench noted that it was admissible as electronic evidence, but generally treated as circumstantial evidence rather than conclusive proof especially without accompanying call transcript or voice recordings.

The verdict said that the CDR in question was obtained through the technical branch of the Counter-Terrorism Department (CTD) and produced in the trial court on plain sheets.

“After having commented on the specifics of the case from a legal perspective and giving our observations on the evidence relied upon for the conviction, we would like to record that the Sindh Police failed completely in solving and proving this case,” it added. “The alleged actual shooters i.e. Bilal and Hasnain disappeared into thin air, and the police had nothing to say about them. No effort was made to get the shooters. Important leads like the bullet match with a pistol in an earlier case were ignored,” it added.

The bench further noted that no effort was made to record the confessions before a magistrate and a deliberate attempt appeared to have been made to avoid producing the CDR in a professional, complete and legal manner.

“The police have some brilliant and brave investiga Hasnain disappeared into thin air, and the police had nothing to say about them. No effort was made to get the shooters. Important leads like the bullet match with a pistol in an earlier case were ignored,” it said and added no effort was made to record the confessions before a magistrate and a deliberate attempt appeared to have been made to avoid producing the CDR in a professional, complete and legal manner.

“The police have some brilliant and brave investigators. What compelled the police to conduct a weak investigation in this very high-profile case must necessarily be looked into by the inspector general. People’s faith in the police must not be tarnished,” it added.

Published in Dawn, May 6th, 2026