KARACHI, Nov 13: The prosecution concluded its arguments on Tuesday in appeal against conviction in a triple-murder case, arguing that the conviction and death sentence awarded by an anti-terrorism court was maintainable.

The appellate bench comprised Justice Ghulam Nabi Soomro and Justice Ataur Rahman of the Sindh High Court.

The appellant, Ali Nawaz Khoso, was sentenced to death by an anti-terrorism court for Karachi division against which the present appeal was filed.

When the matter came up for hearing, the prosecution counsel, Assistant Advocate-General Sindh Habib Ahmed, responded to a question raised by the court, ie, why the prosecution witness was not put on identification parade before the eyewitness.

Counsel Ahmed said prosecution witness Adil Noor Khan, one of the sons of the complainant, Zahid Noor Khan, was seriously injured as he had received three gunshots in the chest and one in the arm. He was brought in an ambulance to give evidence. The prosecution was thus unable to put him on identification parade. The prosecution counsel, however, did not reply to an observation of the bench that why identification parade was not organized in the hospital.

His contention was that identification in the court was sufficient for conviction of the appellant. In this context, he referred to two cases, one of the Sindh High Court and the other of the Supreme Court.

Habib Ahmed referred to corroborative evidence, and argued that the weapon allegedly used in the incident, Kalashnikov, was recovered on a lead given by the appellant and the empties recovered from the scene matched with the weapon.

According to the prosecution, the accused, accompanied by two other accused, entered house of the complainant, Zahid Noor Khan, after cutting the iron grill of kitchen.

The wife of the complainant raised alarm and a scuffle ensued in which one of them was injured and later killed by his accomplice dacoits who fled. They also gunned down three sons of the complainant who had rushed to grab the dacoits, not anticipating that they could be killed.

The case was first tried by a military trial court and later by an ATC which convicted the accused, Khoso, and sentenced him to death.

It was the contention of Abdul Waheed Katpar, the counsel for the appellant, that according to the prosecution the incident occurred on August 23, 1998 and the accused was arrested on October 30, 1998. No identification parade was held before a judicial officer though both the complainant and the injured eyewitness to the incident were available.

A watchman, Tahir, was taken by police for identification of the accused, but he was not examined in the trial court by the prosecution.

The counsel for the appellant, Mr Katpar, who had earlier concluded his submissions, would be given an opportunity to counter the prosecution’s contention on Wednesday.

Shakir Latif case: An appellate bench of the Sindh High Court gave on Tuesday an appellant, who was awarded death sentence by an anti-terrorism court for kidnapping and killing a young lawyer, two weeks’ time to engage a counsel.

The time was given to the accused/appellant Shaikh Mohammed Amjad when his appeal challenging the death sentence awarded by the ATC-III came up for hearing before the bench comprising Justice Ghulam Nabi Soomro and Justice Ataur Rahman.

When proceedings commenced, the appellant, who was awarded death sentence for kidnapping and killing of Barrister Shakir Latif, requested for time to engage a lawyer, which was granted.

M. Ilyas Khan, representing the state, submitted that the appeal was filed one month ago but the appellant had failed to hire a lawyer.

The appellant filed the appeal from the Central Prison Karachi, praying for set aside the impugned judgment of the ATC and declare it unlawful. It was also his prayer to reinvestigate the case and its retrial by another judge.

On Oct 3, Judge Arshad Noor Khan of the ATC-III had awarded death sentence on two counts to the appellant with a fine of Rs200,000.

The appellant was arrested on Aug 4 after an FIR was lodged by complainant Fazalur Rahman who alleged that Shaikh Mohammed Amjad had kidnapped his son Shakir Latif on July 29 at Marriott Hotel and subsequently killed him by giving poisonous liquor.

He alleged that later the accused contacted the complainant on phone and demanded Rs20 million as ransom. On negotiation, the accused reduced his demand to Rs2.5 million. The CPLC and police traced his phone call and on Aug 4 arrested him when he was calling to the dead man’s father from a telephone booth in Saddar.

On a lead given by him police recovered the body of Shakir Latif from the trunk of his own car parked in a rented house in Defence Housing Authority. He had confessed that he had killed Shakir on July 29 by giving poisonous juice.

The bench also directed the office to fix an application filed by the appellant’s wife, Nabeela Amjad, challenging the order of confiscation of her car by the trial court, with the main appeal.