May 12 carnage: Why re-hear the petition, court questions plaintiff

The case was earlier dismissed after the petitioner withdrew it.


Our Correspondent November 02, 2012

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court has told the lawyer of the petitioner, who wants the court to re-hear the May 12 carnage case, to explain why the case should be reopened.

The petition, seeking a judicial inquiry into the bloody incidents of that day and the trial of former president General (retd) Pervez Musharraf, was earlier dismissed as the plaintiff withdrew it.
Over 50 people were killed on May 12, 2007, in clashes between political activists of different parties during the visit of (then deposed) Supreme Court Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry to Karachi.

The plaintiff had withdrawn his petition on November 19, 2007, and went to the court again after the restoration of the "pre-November 3 emergency" judiciary.

He cited the Muttahida Qaumi Movement chief and the Sindh home adviser, home secretary, federal interior secretary, Rangers director-general, Sindh police chief, Karachi police chief and the City Courts SHO of that time as respondents. The petitioner also moved a miscellaneous application, accusing former president Pervez Musharraf of being responsible for the entire episode.

On Friday, the petitioner's lawyer requested the court to form a larger bench comprising at least three non-Provisional Constitutional Order judges to re-hear the case. On the court's question, he claimed that the applicant had earlier withdrawn the case under pressure.

Opposing the plea, Additional Advocate General Muhammad Sarwar Khan requested the court to dismiss the petition as the petitioner had himself withdrawn it earlier.

After hearing their arguments, the division bench headed by Chief Justice Mushir Alam directed the petitioner's lawyer to come prepared on the next hearing date to argue on the petition's maintainability.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ