The counsel for the convicts in a case pertaining to the conspiracy to kill former president Pervez Musharraf contended that the confessional statements of the appellants could not be used against them for conviction as the same was not corroborated by the prosecution with other evidence.
An anti-terrorism court in Karachi had in 2008 found Mohammad Imran, Haneef and Mohammad Ashraf guilty of hatching a conspiracy to kill the then president, Pervez Musharaf, and sentenced them to an aggregate 35 years in prison.
The court, however, had acquitted Sharib Arsalan Farooqui, Mohammad Jameel and Waseem Akhtar, co-accused in the same case, as the charge against them could not be proved by the prosecution.
The prosecution alleged that the accused, who had been against the Musharraf government’s policies on Afghanistan and Kashmir after 9/11, planned to assassinate him and fitted an explosive to a vehicle at Shahra-e-Faisal in Karachi to blow the convoy of the former president on April 26, 2002, but failed to achieve their objective.
The appellants’ counsel, Abdul Waheed Katpar, contended that the confessional statements of Imran, Hanif and Ashraf were neither obtained voluntarily nor were they conducted by the judicial magistrate in accordance with the law and dictum laid down by the superior courts, submitting that they could not be used against them for conviction as the same were not corroborated by the prosecution with other evidence.
The counsel also said that the appellants retracted from their statements in the trial court and such statements could not be pressed into service of conviction until they were corroborated in material particulars apart from confessional statements.
He submitted that no offence under the charge of conspiracy was made out.
He said that the prosecution’s case was of no evidence, and the conviction was unsubstantial. The SHC’s division bench, headed by Justice Shahid Anwar Bajwa, adjourned the hearing till July 26.
An anti-terrorism court in Karachi had in 2008 found Mohammad Imran, Haneef and Mohammad Ashraf guilty of hatching a conspiracy to kill the then president, Pervez Musharaf, and sentenced them to an aggregate 35 years in prison.
The court, however, had acquitted Sharib Arsalan Farooqui, Mohammad Jameel and Waseem Akhtar, co-accused in the same case, as the charge against them could not be proved by the prosecution.
The prosecution alleged that the accused, who had been against the Musharraf government’s policies on Afghanistan and Kashmir after 9/11, planned to assassinate him and fitted an explosive to a vehicle at Shahra-e-Faisal in Karachi to blow the convoy of the former president on April 26, 2002, but failed to achieve their objective.
The appellants’ counsel, Abdul Waheed Katpar, contended that the confessional statements of Imran, Hanif and Ashraf were neither obtained voluntarily nor were they conducted by the judicial magistrate in accordance with the law and dictum laid down by the superior courts, submitting that they could not be used against them for conviction as the same were not corroborated by the prosecution with other evidence.
The counsel also said that the appellants retracted from their statements in the trial court and such statements could not be pressed into service of conviction until they were corroborated in material particulars apart from confessional statements.
He submitted that no offence under the charge of conspiracy was made out.
He said that the prosecution’s case was of no evidence, and the conviction was unsubstantial. The SHC’s division bench, headed by Justice Shahid Anwar Bajwa, adjourned the hearing till July 26.
No comments:
Post a Comment