SHC issues notices to all accused acquitted of Baldia factory arson

The Sindh High Court (SHC) on Tuesday issued pre-admission notices to Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) leader Abdul Rauf Siddiqui and other co-accused who had been acquitted in the Baldia garment factory arson attack case.

The state had filed an appeal against the acquittal of Siddiqui and the other acquitted co-accused following a strongly worded observation by the SHC in the case. The court had earlier taken exception to the non-filing of appeals against the acquittal of the co-accused, including Siddiqui, in the Baldia factory fire case.

The SHC said that the court might itself take notice if it considers the acquittal appeal ought to have been filed and the so-called influential accused are being deliberately and intentionally being shielded by the state.

The court had observed that it seems that the big fish in the case are being protected by not filing appeals against their acquittal by the trial court. An SHC division bench headed by Justice Mohammad Karim Khan Agha said that these appeals have been pending since 2020 and need to be decided because most of the 2020 and 2021 appeals have been dealt with. The court said that there were 400 witnesses in the appeal and none of the defence witnesses were examined.

The appellants’ counsel said that he will prepare a document whereby the witnesses are divided into batches, and in each batch the evidence of the witnesses concerned will be stated as regards the incident and the identification of the bodies as well as the material witnesses who linked the appellants to the commission of the offence.

The court directed the appellants’ counsel as well as the additional prosecutor general to jointly file a document to enable the court to decide these appeals more expeditiously. The court also issued an intimation notice to the counsel of the appellants Abdul Rehman and Fazal Ahmed as well as the counsel of the Rangers for the next date of hearing.

MQM activists Abdul Rehman (alias Bhola), Mohammad Zubair and other factory employees have filed appeals in the SHC against their conviction in the Baldia garment factory arson attack case.

Rehman and Zubair were sentenced to death while four of the factory’s gatekeepers — Shahrukh, Fazal Ahmed, Arshad Mehmood and Ali Mohammad — were sentenced to life imprisonment by an anti-terrorism court that found them guilty of murder, extortion, arson and terrorism. MQM leader Rauf Siddiqui, who was accused of being involved in the incident, was acquitted by the court for want of evidence, along with other co-accused Umar Hasan Qadri, Dr Abdul Sattar Khan and Iqbal Adeeb Khanum. The MQM’s Tanzeemi committee head Hammad Siddiqui and Ali Hasan Qadri were declared proclaimed offenders in the case.

According to the prosecution, the factory was set on fire by MQM leaders and activists over the non-payment of Rs250 million in extortion. The main accused, Rehman, had admitted in a confessional statement that the Ali Enterprises garment factory in Baldia Town was set on fire on the order of former MQM Karachi Tanzeemi Committee incharge Hammad Siddiqui over the factory owners’ refusal to pay Rs250 million in extortion.

Around 260 factory workers had been burnt alive while many others had suffered injuries on September 11, 2012, when the factory had been set on fire. Appellants Zubair ‘Charya’ and Abdul Rehman ‘Bhola’ have laid the blame on the factory owners for the fire in their appeals. They have alleged that the factory doors were closed when the fire broke out on the “orders of the owners”.

“There was no emergency exit for the workers [when the fire broke out],” the accused said in the appeal. They added that the people perished in the fire due to the “negligence of the factory owners and the related departments”.

Both the MQM workers have maintained that in the initial report, the factory owners were held responsible for the fire, adding that the “real culprits” were acquitted in the joint investigation report.

Both Rehman and Zubair claimed that the court had not scrutinised the evidence. They also alleged that no CCTV camera footage had been included as evidence in the trial court, and appealed that the court’s verdict be declared illegal.