Pakistan

Five questions framed: Supreme Court accepts Mumtaz Qadri’s appeal

Court hearing adjourned for the month of October

Hasnaat Mailk May 14, 2015

Mumtaz Qadri PHOTO: AFP

ISLAMABAD: The top court has accepted the plea of Mumtaz Qadri, who had killed former Punjab Governor Salman Taseer over alleged blasphemy remarks for regular hearing and adjourned the hearing till the month of October.

After hearing the arguments of Qadri’s lawyer, the three judge bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa framed five questions in this matter for consideration, therefore Mumtaz Qadri’s appeal was allowed and leave granted.

Firstly, did any utterance of the former governor Punjab in fact amount to blasphemy?

Secondly, if the petitioner did think the governor had committed blasphemy, did petitioner in his own private capacity have the right to kill the governor?

Thirdly, even if he was motivated by religious sentiment, still the petitioner could kill at a time when he was performing official duty as a security guard.

Fourthly, if the petitioner had confessed to the killing of deceased before the trial court then would it not attract sections 302A and 304 of PPC, which carriy the punishment of death and have no alternative sentence.

Fifthly, in case the petitioner’s conviction is not entertained by this court then are there any mitigating circumstances available warranting reduction in the sentence.

The bench has also noted that the record of the case shows that Mumtaz Qadri, the petitioner, had admitted killing of Governor Salman Taseer as is evident from his reply.

The court further noted that apparently the governor had not uttered any word which depicts that the governor had defiled the sacred name of Holy Prophet (PBUH).

Qadri’s counsel Mian Nazir Akhtar argued that his client killed the ex-governor Punjab as he had committed blasphemy under Section 295(C) of PPC. “In the backdrop Qadri was justified in murdering the former governor Punjab,” he contended,

Regarding the federation appeal, the court noted that Advocate General Islamabad, appearing on behalf of state, argued that the Islamabad High Court held that this case did not attract the definition of terrorism, as contained in section 7 of ATA.

The court noted that the contention of AG Islamabad also requires consideration therefore leave to appeal was granted. The office is directed to club both the appeals and fix the case in October.

COMMENTS (4)

A J Khan | 8 years ago | Reply The Judiciary has still not come out of the dark shadow of Iftikhar Ch. It is still unjust, lethargic & compromised.

zakaullah butt | 8 years ago | Reply Let us be fair to ourselves. Salman Taseer good or bad. Does any one have the right to form a court by himself declare a verdict based on ignorance and kill a person whom it was your duty to defend. This guy Qadri was a paid person who committed an unpardonable crime abetted by people in the garb of religion having no clue as to what religion is. The courts seem to be scared to pass a verdict, the counsel wants to become famous by posing to defend a glaring criminal killing in broad daylight in public. The culprit should have been publicly beheaded the next day. I was dead against those opposing the blasphemy law, however if this is the mode of implementing it, we ought to reconsider it.

VIEW MORE COMMENTS

Replying to X