Shahzeb Khan. PHOTO: FILE
The prosecution has given up yet another witness in the Shahzeb Khan murder trial, but this time it claimed that the witness “has been won over by the accused party”.
Abdul Maroof the temporary special public prosecutor who is covering for Muntazir Mehdi, attended the hearing at the Anti-Terrorism Court on Tuesday since Mehdi is away on leave. Maroof told the court that he has given up a witness because his statements would no longer support the prosecution.
“It’s better to give up a prosecution witness who would tell lies afterwards,” he said.
When the issue came up for hearing the defence counsel, Amir Mansoob, requested the court to call the ballistic expert for his opinion on matching the empties and the gun used in the alleged shooting.
Maroof raised, however, objections on the request saying that the expert was a prosecution witness and would be called if there was any ambiguity in the forensic science lab report.
After hearing this, the defence counsel moved an application under section 540 read with section 510 of the Criminal Procedure Code to call the expert for his statement.
The prosecutor explained that his arguments have yet to be concluded and the expert is still on the witness list so he would be called when required. He called the application “premature”.
Judge Ghulam Mustafa Memon heard both the counsel and reserved the verdict until the next hearing today.
The murder trial began when Shahzeb Khan, 20, was allegedly shot by Shahrukh Jatoi, after a petty argument with Nawab Siraj Ali Talpur, his younger brother Nawab Sajjad Ali Talpur and a servant, Ghulam Murtaza Lashari on December 25 last year.
Transfer of cases
On the suspect Shahrukh’s plea to transfer his case away from the ATC to an ordinary court, the Sindh High Court asked the defence lawyer to argue on maintainability.
Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, who headed the bench, told the lawyer Ashraf Kazi to present his arguments on April 24.
Earlier, Shahrukh Jatoi had made a similar request to the ATC judge, who had dismissed it after noting that the offence falls within the ambit of the anti-terrorism act, which justifies the hearings at the ATC.
Meanwhile, the victim’s family filed an application to become an intervener in the proceedings, questioning the jurisdiction of the special or ordinary court to try the case.
Published in The Express Tribune, April 17th, 2013.
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