Khan, 57, was part of an 11-member team of the Tableeghi Jamaat that travelled from Raiwind to Chiniot for preaching. The team leader, Waliur Rehman, was murdered in the same attack on Wednesday in which Khan was injured. Khan was admitted to the Allied Hospital, Faisalabad where he breathed his last.
70-year-old Tableeghi Jamaat preacher murdered over sectarian beliefs
The team camped at Chiniot on August 20 to apprise the Muslim community about the teaching of Islamic jurisprudence and worship.
They camped in Qila Asiyaan on the outskirts of Chiniot and started door-to-door preaching. During this, Rehman, Khan and their group went to the house of Ikram Khan, a student of Darul Uloom Muhammadia Ghousia.
Saddar Police Station SHO Muhammad Afzal told The Express Tribune that Waliur Rehman had an argument with Ikram Khan over a difference of opinion over religious beliefs in the presence of Abdullah and others on last Tuesday.
“On the day of the incident, Rehman and Khan were sleeping in a mosque when accused Ikram and Imran attacked them with a spade," he added.
“As a result, Rehman was killed on the spot while Abdullah suffered critical injuries on various parts of the body.”
Khan, who had suffered critical injuries on various parts of his body was shifted to Allied Hospital in critical condition where he succumbed to injuries on Friday night.
Sub-Inspector Muhammad Yuqub, the investigation officer of the case, told The Express Tribune that during investigation it had been found that Ikram had committed the murder alone. He added that Ikram had confessed to his crime.
Religious scholar killed in DI Khan attack
“The accused in his statement under section 161 Criminal Procedure of Code said that deceased had committed blasphemy by uttering disrespectful remarks against the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and so he killed him, considering it his religious belief and duty.
The officer said Ikram was now regretting that he committed the murder.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ