SHC seeks comments from AG on Naqeeb’s father’s plea to change trial court

While hearing a petition filed by Naqeebullah Mehsud’s family seeking the transfer of the murder trial against former Malir SSP Rao Anwar from Anti-Terrorism Court-II to another court, the Sindh High Court on Monday issued notices to the Sindh advocate general, prosecutor general and others seeking their comments.

Mohammad Khan, father of Naqeebullah, the South Waziristan-native who was murdered in a fake police encounter in January, said in his petition that the key accused Rao Anwar and his subordinates had been booked for murdering his son and three other citizens in a fake encounter in Shah Latif Town.

He added that the anti-terrorism court hearing the case was giving undue benefit to the accused by not passing orders on his (the petitioner’s) objections and that he had concerns that the presiding officer of the concerned ATC would not be able to act fairly and impartially while deciding the case.

Khan’s counsel Faisal Siddiqui said the trial court had developed a bias in favour of Anwar and his subordinate officers, and that bias was apparent from the fact that the presiding officer had to date failed to consider and pass any order on the written objections filed by the applicant.

Siddiqui said it was a settled principle of law that while hearing a bail application, a court should not go into deeper appreciation of evidence, however, the presiding officer of the ATC while going into deeper appreciation of evidence had given a detailed order on the bail application of the main accused and also made statements in his favour. That showed that the judge had already made up her mind regarding the outcome of the extrajudicial murder case, he argued.

The counsel further submitted that one of the prosecution witnesses retracted his statement which proved that Anwar was influencing the proceedings before the trial court and prejudicing his interest in the case.

He said that despite submitting an application before the trial court, no protection had been provided to the other prosecution witnesses. The lawyer added he was concerned that more witnesses would retract their statements due to the threats being made to them, which would in turn weaken the prosecution’s case.

Khan’s counsel further stated that the applicant had developed a reasonable apprehension that the ATC presiding officer would not be able to act fairly and impartially in the case. Unless the transfer application was allowed, the case would be decided in violation of the applicant’s right to a fair and impartial trial, which was in violation of the applicant’s rights as guaranteed under Articles 4, 9 and 10-A of the Constitution, he said.

The high court was requested to allow the Khan’s application and transfer the trial proceedings from ATC-II to any other competent court of the law in the interest of justice. After a preliminary hearing of the petition, the SHC issued notices to the advocate general, prosecutor general and other respondents and called for their comments on August 20.

Mehsud’s father has consistently expressed a lack of confidence in the ATC judge hearing the murder case, while his counsels have repeatedly claimed that Anwar is being given special treatment, as he did not spend a single day behind bars following his arrest nor has he ever appeared in hearings in handcuffs.