Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Pakistan (MQM-P) on Monday claimed three people lost their lives while one person sustained injuries during a shootout at its office in Karachi's Machar Colony, Express News reported.
Contrary to MQM-P’s claims, SSP Keamari Arif Aslam Rao stated that the incident was a result of a personal dispute over land and lacked any political connections.
He explained that an ongoing conflict between two groups led to the incident, emphasising that there was no presence of any political party office at the scene. The primary suspect, Nasir Pathan, and an accomplice have been taken into custody, he added.
Read More: MQM-P says will empower people
He said that one of the deceased was identified as Raees. All of the deceased were transported to a hospital for necessary medico-legal procedures.
Rejecting the police's version, the MQM-P spokesperson said that the firing incident occurred at one of their election offices when a team of national and provincial assembly candidates were on a visit.
کراچی : ایم کیوایم کے الیکشن آفس کے قریب فائرنگ، 3 افراد جاں بحق!!
— Express News (@ExpressNewsPK) December 11, 2023
follow our WhatsApp channel:https://t.co/HCATVJBjKj#Expressnews #Pakistan #News #MQMPakistan #karachi #firing pic.twitter.com/VqL9rGvTnO
He accused armed individuals affiliated with the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) of being involved in the incident.
Anis Qaimkhani, the senior deputy convener of MQM-P, strongly condemned the attack, attributing it to "terrorists from the PPP" led by their local party’s head.
Read More: MQM-P raises serious objection to fresh delimitation
Qaimkhani revealed that their party workers, Osman and Malik Fayyaz, were actively participating in the election campaign when the unfortunate incident transpired.
Taking notice of the incident, IG Sindh Riffat Mukhtar directed the SSP to submit a detailed report on the matter and urged swift action to apprehend the culprits and ensure justice.
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