SHC moved against death sentence awarded to militant leader

The Sindh High Court (SHC) on Monday issued a notice to the federal law officer on a petition against the death sentence awarded by a military court to a leader of a banned militant outfit.

Petitioner Kulsoom Bano said her brother Attaur Rehman, alias Naeem Bukhari, had been picked up by personnel of the law enforcement agencies on August 29, 2015, when he was travelling to Hyderabad from his house.

She said the family had approached the court for his recovery, but they had received calls from people asking them to withdraw the case if they wanted to meet the detainee, so they withdrew their petition after meeting the detainee at a detention centre.

She added that the family later came to know that the detainee had been sentenced to death by a military court on December 5, 2016, in connection with terrorism, while the prisoner had been admitted to the central prison on December 1, 2022.

The petitioner said the jail authorities had now informed them that they had shifted the detainee to the Hyderabad prison but they did not provide the relevant documents with regard to the prisoner’s shifting.

She said the conviction awarded to the detainee was illegal because no civilian could be tried by a military court. She said the military authorities had also been approached for copies of the judgment but they were not provided to the petitioner’s family.

She requested the SHC to declare that the military court had no jurisdiction to try the civilian and award him punishment. She also requested that the federal government be directed to provide a copy of the military court’s judgment.

She further requested that the military court’s judgement be suspended until her petition was decided, while the detainee be provided with all the medical facilities in accordance with the jail manual.

After the preliminary hearing of the petition, an SHC division bench headed by Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto issued a notice to the federal law officer, calling for his comments on the petition. The bench also directed the petitioner’s counsel to satisfy the court about the petition’s maintainability.