KARACHI, Jan 11: A sessions court on Tuesday issued a warrant for the arrest of an accused who was earlier granted bail in the Jeddah heroin trafficking case.

Syed Sarwat Hussain, his wife, Shafia, and their son, Syed Afraz Hussain, have been charged with gifting heroin-filled footwear to the Umrah pilgrims in June 2008 who were subsequently detained by the Saudi authorities following their arrival at Jeddah airport on charges of drug trafficking.

While the court had granted bail to Afraz, he has not been appearing before the court for the last couple of months.

The additional district and sessions court (east) issued a non-bailable warrant for the arrest of the accused and also issued a notice to the surety for Jan 20. The remaining two accused are still in jail custody.

According to the prosecution, the accused posed as agents of a travel agency and sent eight Pakistanis to Saudi Arabia to perform Umrah. Three of them were their relatives and they gifted ahram and heroin-filled footwear, without informing them about the drug, before their departure to Saudi Arabia, it alleged. The couple had surrendered themselves to the police on June 22, 2008 while their son was arrested from their Korangi residence and the police claimed to have seized heroin found in the house.

A case (FIR 232/2009) was registered against the accused persons under Sections 120-B (punishment of criminal conspiracy) and 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property) of the Pakistan Penal Code on the complaint of the father of a victim at the Awami Colony police station.

Order on bail reserved

An anti-terrorism court on Tuesday reserved its verdict on the bail plea of a suspect in a kidnap and ransom case.

Ali Hasan Brohi along with his accomplices is facing the trial for allegedly kidnapping Azhar Shah within the remit of the Gulshan-i-Maymar police station and demanding ransom for his safe release.

The suspect through his counsel filed a bail application and the judge of ATC-III Anand Ram Hotwani reserved the order till Jan 14 after hearing both sides.

The applicant's lawyer argued that his client was falsely implicated in this case as the alleged victim had submitted an undertaking in the court stating that he was never kidnapped by the applicant.

Pleading the court to allow the bail, he contended that the victim was forced to identify the applicant during an identification parade, thus it had no legal weight.

However, special public prosecutor Mubashir Mirza opposed the plea arguing that the identification parade was held in accordance with the law and requested the court to indict the suspect and record the statement of the learned magistrate who conducted the identification parade. He said this would clarify the legal status of the parade.

He maintained that the victim's undertaking was premature since the case was at an initial stage.

He prayed to the court to dismiss the plea since the applicant was an influential person and may influence the witnesses if the court granted him bail.

A case (31/2010) was registered under Sections 365-A, 109 and 34 of the penal code, read with Section 7 of the Anti-terrorism Act, on the complaint of the victim's father.