Sindh High Court issues notices over detention of Pearl accused

The Sindh High Court (SHC) issued notices to the Sindh prosecutor-general and advocate-general over a plea challenging the extended detention of the men acquitted of American journalist Daniel Pearl's murder.

A two-member bench comprising Justice Abdul Malik Gaddi and Justice Mrs Kausar Sultana was hearing the plea, the same day it emerged the Sindh government had extended the men's detention for another three months, citing fears of terrorist activity by them.

The petitioner's counsel maintained that despite the acquittal of Omar Saeed, Fahad Naseem, Salman Saqib and Shaikh Mohammad, the Sindh government continued to detain them under Section 11-EEE of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997. He claimed their imprisonment for the past 20 years was illegal.

"What is the procedure for detaining the accused again if the period of confinement ends?" asked Justice Gaddi, upon which the counsel said he had not received any notice nor did he have the case file.

Justice Gaddi remarked that a SHC-led board is formed for the re-confinement of the accused in such cases, asking if this had been done.

The counsel claimed no such board was formed by the Sindh Home Department but the extension notification was still issued.

The court issued notices to the prosecutor-general and advocate-general, seeking a reply from them on August 7.

The Sindh government had re-arrested the four accused for three months just hours after they were acquitted of Pearl's murder in April, on the basis of threats to law and order. The SHC had commuted Saeed's death sentence to seven years and acquitted the three others, serving life terms.

Verdict upheld

The bench also upheld the sentence awarded to alleged Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) worker Muhammad Imran alias Imran Saeed in a case pertaining to burning citizens to death in the Tahir Plaza incident.

The special public prosecutor said that Imran had set Tahir Plaza ablaze in 2008, burning six people alive. He stated an anti-terrorism court had sentenced Imran to 21 years of imprisonment, adding that the convict had also confessed to his involvement in the incident.

Justice Gaddi remarked that the court could not nullify Imran's sentence as strong evidence had been provided against him.

The court rejected Imran's appeal against the sentence.