KARACHI, Jan 14: An appellate bench of the Sindh High Court on Friday set aside the conviction of three activists of the banned Lashkar-i-Jhangvi in a murder case.The bench, headed by Justice Gulzar Ahmed, allowed the appeals of Mufti Shahid Haneef, Haider Ali and Mohammad Talha against their conviction.

Two of the appellants had been handed down capital punishment while the third was sentenced to life imprisonment by an anti-terrorism court for murdering Dr Ishrat Hussain in North Nazimabad's Block D on July 8, 2001.

The bench also dismissed the appeal of the state for enhancing the life imprisonment of the convict to the death penalty.Notification issued by law secy quashedThe Sindh High Court on Friday cancelled the transfer of a deputy prosecutor general (DPG) and an assistant prosecutor general (APG).

While allowing the petitions of DPG Khadim Hussain and APG Muntazir Mehadi against their transfer, a division bench quashed the notification placing the two prosecutors at the disposal of the district public prosecutors of Jacobabad and Kambar-Shahdadkot, respectively.

The two petitioners had challenged the notification issued by the provincial law secretary.

They stated that there were two different cadres — office of the Prosecutor General and the office of the District Public Prosecutors — and they could not be transferred or assume their services under the district public prosecutor or at the district level.

Sindh Prosecutor General Shahadat Awan, appearing as a respondent, contended that the provincial law secretary had no authority to issue the impugned notification as under Section 5 (2) of the Criminal Prosecution Services (Constitution, functions and Powers) Act, 2009, public prosecutor, additional prosecutor general, deputy prosecutor general and assistant prosecutor general performed their functions under the control and supervision of the prosecutor general and general superintendence of the government.

Mr Awan referred to the case of Mehram Ali Vs Federation of Pakistan (PLD 1998 SC 1445) and argued that there could not be effective control and supervision unless the powers to transfer the prosecutors within the province were exercised by the prosecutor general.

He argued that that there could be no effective control and supervision unless the prosecutor general was empowered to transfer his law officer from one district to another or from one court to another.

He prayed that the impugned notification be declared illegal for having been issued by the provincial law secretary without lawful authority.

The bench observed in its judgment that the services of the petitioners could not be placed at the disposal of the respective district public prosecutors.

Moreover, it also ruled that the question of placing the services of such prosecutors at the disposal of the district public prosecutor was uncalled for.

“Since we have come to the conclusion that the services of the petitioners could not be placed at the disposal of the public prosecutor and the impugned notification cannot be sustained, therefore, the question of competence of the respondent No. 2 [provincial law secretary] to issue such notification is no more germane to the controversy and can be decided in appropriate proceedings. In view of what has been discussed above, the petitions are allowed and the impugned notification is hereby quashed.”

Freewill couple caseA division bench headed by Justice Gulzar Ahmed disposed of a constitutional petition of a freewill couple with the direction to the investigation officer to record the statement of the woman for the disposal of a false kidnapping case against her husband.

The couple — Feroza Khatoon and Sultan Khan — both residents of Naushehro Feroz, had married on Nov 30, 2010, in Bhiriya, after the woman executed her freewill certificate before a magistrate.

Later, the woman's father lodged an FIR against Khan for kidnapping his daughter.

The couple approached the SHC through a constitutional petition seeking protection from the woman's relatives and the cancellation of the FIR.

The bench ordered the investigation officer to record the statement of the woman at the office of the advocate general.

It also ordered the IO to file a final report with the area magistrate for the disposal of the case.

The bench also directed the area magistrate to pass an order within one week.