 |
| |
WEEKLY
SECTIONS |
 |
|
 |
| Murtaza Bhutto murder case judgment reserved for Dec 5 |
|
|
|
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
By Shamim Bano
Karachi
Judgement in the Mir Murtaza Bhutto murder case was reserved by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, East for December 5 after the final arguments concluded on Tuesday.
The proceedings, which started at noon, lasted for five hours with a jam-packed court room. Ghinva Bhutto, Chairperson Pakistan People’s Party - Shaheed Bhutto (SB) along with hundreds of party loyalists attended the proceedings. On the occasion, a large number of lawyers and media personnel were also present in the courtroom.
Deputy District Public Prosecutor (DDPP) Mazhar Qayyum read out the details of the case, statements of prosecution witnesses and medical report and later stated that the accused be awarded capital punishment as the charges levelled against them had been proven by the prosecution.
In his wide-ranging arguments, the counsel said that the site of the crime scene was washed out as in the case of Benazir Bhutto by the establishment.
Referring to delay in the case, he held the state responsible as 16 judges were changed and many of them were transferred, while the police witnesses were told by their superiors not to appear in the court in order to delay the proceedings. Besides records were tampered and removed, he maintained.
He said that bodies and vehicles were removed from the crime scene and records disappeared, adding that the police even failed to find any empty bullet shells or blood stains on the spot.
He alleged that Wajid Ali Durrani had phoned Shoaib Suddle and explained the entire plan to eliminate Mir Murtaza Bhutto and his associates.
He further said that the lights of Shahrah-e-Iran were switched off, while 80 to 100 police personnel were deployed to check the arm licences of Bhutto’s companions. He alleged that the policemen were deployed to eliminate Bhutto and his companions and executed their plan.
He contended that if Mir Murtaza’s companions were heavily armed and had sophisticated weapons, then the accused who were sitting in the court would not have been alive today.
He disclosed that Asif Ali Zardari had told Murtaza Bhutto in 1988 not to come to Pakistan and stay in Damascus and that he would provide all finances for his business. However, Murtaza returned in 1993 and soon after landing he was arrested at the airport and 81 cases were registered against him but he was acquitted in all cases.
Referring to the 10-member medical board, the DDPP said that it declared that Shahid Hayat and Haq Nawaz Sial had self-inflicted injuries and two days later Sial, who linked the entire chain, was found dead in mysterious circumstances and it was not known whether he committed suicide or was killed.
The counsel said that Rai Tahir had shot dead Murtaza Bhutto with his 9mm pistol, contrary to the claims that he shifted Murtaza Bhutto to Mid East Hospital, which was officially not assigned for such emergencies. He asked why Murtaza was not taken to JPMC. Murtaza Bhutto was shifted to hospital at about 9:15 pm and at about 11:55 pm he was pronounced dead.
Narrating the whole episode, the counsel alleged that the action was premeditated and intentional in order to eliminate Murtaza Bhutto as he was considered a threat to the establishment. He also referred to the sketches of the victims as to how they received bullets in their bodies and termed it a targeted massacre.
He questioned as to why the police were checking for arms in the dark as street lights were off; why warrants were not executed to the victims; why the bodies of the victims were shifted to JPMC six hours later; and why the government exerted pressure to change the medical board’s record.
He said that all the accused were rewarded - Shakaib Qureshi and Asiif Ali Zardari were acquitted, and Shoaib Suddle was given a 27-month extension in his service.
He said that false and fabricated cases were registered against SB leaders and workers. He said that all the policemen involved in the shootout are liable for death sentence, adding that the victims’ families have been denied justice. He prayed the court to award death sentence to all the accused.
The arguments were opened by Wajid Ali Durran’s counsel Qazi Ashraf advocate, who contended that conflicting statements of the witnesses and medical examination report corroborated that Wajid Ali Durrani was not present on the spot and he did not open fire. He prayed the court that his client was falsely implicated in the case and he may be acquitted honourably.
Advocate Iftikhar Choudhry, counsel for Shahid Hayat and Rai Tahir, argued that the complainant of the FIR was not present in the court and a false and fabricated case was registered against his clients.
He said that the prosecution failed to produce any evidences against them, adding that even the complainant did not know the time and place and the person who ordered to open fire on Murtaza Bhutto.
He said that it was being alleged that the main accused Asif Ali Zardari had conspired to eliminate Murtaza Bhutto and his companions and he has been acquitted then there arises no question of conspiracy against the remaining accused and they may also be acquitted.
He alleged that Murtaza’s guards were armed with sophisticated weapons and they started firing when the police officials stopped their convoy to search for arms and as a result Haq Nawaz Sial and Shahid Hayat were injured.
He also contended that the name of Rai Tahir was not mentioned in the FIR and he had also shifted Murtaza Bhutto to hospital at about 9.20 pm, which was on record. Murtaza’s companion Asghar Ali had also stated on TV that a 2-star policeman had shifted Murtaza Bhutto to Mid East Hospital, he added. He prayed the court that his clients were innocent and be acquitted.
Furthermore, he added, that Murtaza’s guards were wanted in many criminal cases including raids on CIA centres, bomb blasts as well as in the murder case of ATC Judge Nabi Sher Junejo and Hyderabad carnage case of 1988, and they had been resisting their arrest so their evidences were not credible.
Similarly, Ali bin Adam Jaffery, counsel for accused Abdul Basit, stated that his client was falsely implicated in the case and prayed the court to acquit him.
|
|
|
| Back
| Send
this story to Friend | Print
Version |
|
|
|
ISSN 1563-9479 
