KARACHI, March 20: A division bench of the Sindh High Court on Thursday commuted death sentences awarded to three kidnapping-for-ransom convicts and enhanced the 14-year jail terms handed down to their two accomplices to imprisonment for life.
The five appellants were convicted by an anti-terrorism court of kidnapping a 15-year-old boy in January 2000 and demanding Rs5,000,000 from his father in ransom for his release. The boy was recovered and the kidnappers were arrested by the police after four and a half months. The ATC sentenced accused Moosa Chhuto, Umaid Ali Barfat and Ghafoor Shoro to death and co-accused Jam Chang Mazhar Chang to 14 years in jail under section 365-A of the Pakistan Penal Code and section 7 of the Anti-terrorism Act.
Appearing for the accused in the appeal, Advocate S. Mahmood A. Rizvi submitted that though ransom was allegedly demanded, it was not received. The kidnapped boy failed to identify the accused. There were other extenuating circumstances and the benefit of doubt should go to the accused.
Advocate Mohammed Ameen also argued for acquittal of the two co-accused on the additional ground that they were not alleged to have been directly involved in the offence. Both the counsel claimed that their clients had not previously been involved in any offence.
The appellate bench, which consisted of Justice Sarmad Jalal Osmany and Justice Wahid Bux Brohi, upheld the conviction but commuted death penalty to life imprisonment in case of three principal accused. It also enhanced the jail terms awarded to the two co-accused to life imprisonment as, besides death penalty, it was the only punishment prescribed for kidnapping for ransom under section 365-A of PPC.
Petition disposed of: A division bench of the High Court of Sindh directed on Thursday the nazim of a union council and a petitioner to appear before the SHO Nabi Bux on Friday.
The bench comprised Justice Mohammed Roshan Essani and Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali.
The bench ordered that if a cognizable offence was made out, the SHO concerned should register a case.
The bench was hearing a petition filed by Mohammed Siddique, a shopowner at Hoti Market, whose shop was razed by town officials as it was declared an encroachment.
The petitioner maintained that the respondents, including UC-6 Nazim Zubair Chandio, on Feb 5 demolished his shop and removed articles/goods lying there.
The respondents later encroached on the footpath and the road and built a children’s park, that was illegal, maintained the petitioner.
The petitioner prayed to the court to order registration of FIR against the alleged encroacher and also to order return of goods and articles removed from his shop.
When the matter came up for hearing on Thursday, the bench, after hearing arguments from both sides, disposed of the matter directing the parties to appear before the SHO concerned.
The same bench also disposed of a constitutional petition filed by Mohammed Naeem alias Sanam, a registration clerk at the District Registration Office, Karachi East.
The petitioner maintained that the FIR was registered by the FIA under sections 420/468/471/34 of PPC, whereas the case should have been registered under section 11 of the National Registration Act 1973.
The FIA had no jurisdiction in this particular matter, so the FIR registered by the FIA be quashed, the petitioner maintained.
When the petition came up for hearing, Standing Counsel Mehmood Alam Rizvi sought time to file comments in the matter at which the bench put off further hearing to a date to be fixed by the office of the court.—APP