Juvenile jail authorities told to present key accused in court

Karachi
The Anti-Terrorism Court (III), while expressing displeasure over non-production of a key accused in the Suleman Lashari murder case on Monday, adjourned the hearing of the case till December 4. The court also sent a notice to juvenile jail authorities, where the accused was currently being held, to submit a reply over the matter.
Eighteen-year-old O-Levels student Suleman Lashari was shot dead at 2am on May 8, 2014 inside his residence in DHA. The main accused, Salman Abro, - son of SSP Ghulam Sarwar Abro - was reported to have barged into the house along with four of his guards (all police constables) to ‘settle a dispute’.
The police officers were identified as Muhammad Rasheed, Yasin, Maqbool and Imran; the case was registered at the Darakshan police station.
The mother, Erum Naz, and brother of the deceased Suleman Lashari had identified the key accused during an identification parade held in a local court four days after the incident.
The accused were presented in judicial magistrate (South) court for the identification by the victim’s family.
All the five accused were taken into custody, whereas Abro was shifted to the juvenile jail after his counsel presented an ossification report which claimed that he was not an adult at the time of committing the crime.
However, the deceased Lashari’s father had challenged the report, praying the court to set up another authentic medical board in order to determine the actual age of the accused.
The accused's vehicle was impounded and the weapons were also seized.
The mother of the deceased had also accused Sindh Chief Minister Qaim Ali Shah of interfering in the investigation since the accused was the son of a high-ranking police officer. However, Shah had refuted the allegations and had ordered provincial police chief Ghulam Hyder Jamali to appoint a new officer and reinvestigate the case.
Earlier, the trial court had rejected two applications of the accused seeking transfer of the case to a civil court and decided to hear the statements of witnesses. The pleas were rejected after the court had heard arguments from both the prosecutions and the defense attorneys, and had issued orders to record the statements of witnesses on October 10. However, the trial was put off after the defense attorney had failed to appear before the court on the date.