KARACHI, Nov 14: Police are still clueless about the three suspected militants after their escape from the city courts premises in 2010 as the proceedings in the 2009 Ashura bombing cases have been at a standstill for around three and a half years.

Murtaza alias Shakil, Mohammad Saqib Farooqui, Wazir Mohammad and Murad Shah, said to be associated with banned militant outfit Jundullah, were booked in four cases pertaining to the attacks on Muharram processions in December 2009, including a devastating bomb blast that ripped through the main Ashura procession on M.A. Jinnah Road, killing more than 45 people.

On June 20, 2010, the suspects were brought to the city courts in connection with a robbery case. After the hearing, the suspects were got freed from the police custody by their accomplices following an armed attack on the city courts premises and one of the four suspects, Murad Shah, was killed while fleeing.

After their escape, the investigating officer submitted a report in court in this regard on June 28, 2010 and the anti-terrorism court-III, where the trial was pending, abated the legal proceedings in all cases and issued life warrants for the arrest of the three suspects and directed the police to arrest and produce them in court as soon as possible.

Regardless of the fact that the suspects ran away around 29 months ago, the city police and their special investigation units have been unable to trace and arrest them.

Following the arrest of the suspects, the special investigation unit (SIU) of police claimed that they were high-profile criminals and associated with Jundullah. The police booked them in high-profile cases.

But it is strange that the suspects were not tried inside the prison if the law-enforcers knew that they were hardened criminals.

According to legal experts, in most of the cases it was the responsibility of investigating officers to send a letter to the provincial home department asking it to notify the jail trial in high-profile cases. Jail officials can also make such recommendations to the home department if they suspect the accused as hardened criminals by monitoring their activities on jail premises or if they have insufficient security while taking them to courts, they added.

Long suspension in the trial of such high-profile cases might cost the cases of the prosecution as the delay in trial always benefited the accused.

In most cases of inordinate delays in trial, prosecution witnesses go underground or change their residence for fear and even in some cases they die. Besides, it is hard for a witness to remember the exact evidence for years while it is also a difficult task for the IOs to maintain the case property, police files and stay in touch with his witnesses.

The police said that the suspects in the present cases were arrested after a shoot-out on Hawkesbay Road on Jan 23, 2010 and claimed that they confessed to having carried out the attacks on the Muharram processions.

They were charge-sheeted under the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 and their cases were sent to the ATC-III for trial and the court had supplied copies of documents to the suspects under Section 265-C of the criminal procedure code. However, they escaped before their indictment.

Murtaza and Saqib Farooqui were booked for their alleged involvement in the shocking blast in the main procession of Ashura on Dec 28, 2009 that killed over 45 people and wounded about 100 others. The duo were also charge-sheeted in the Paposh Nagar blast that took place on Dec 26, 2009 (8th of Muharram) when a Muharram procession was passing by and it left 13 people wounded.

Murad Shah and his absconding accomplices — Haider, Hasnain and Sajid — were charge-sheeted in a case pertaining to a low-intensity blast that targeted the ninth Muharram procession in Qasba Colony on Dec 27, 2009. Seventeen people were wounded in the blast.

All the four suspected militants were also facing trial in another case under Sections 4/5 of the Explosive Substance Act read with Section 7 of the ATA at the Sir Syed police station since the police claimed that they had seized explosive material on a lead given by the suspects.

Similarly, the police suffered another setback when a sessions court acquitted four suspected militants in as many cases related to explosive material for want of evidence and lack of interest on the part of witnesses around a couple of years ago.

The criminal investigation department (CID) had claimed to have arrested Syed Mohammed Waseem aka Imran, Mohammed Aijaz aka Abdul Rehman, Jamil Ahmed aka Wazir Akbar, Mohammed Hamid, aka Qasim and would-be suicide bomber Aziz Ahmed aka Mohammed Khan of a banned militant outfit on the eve of Ashura in January 2008 in New Karachi. It also alleged that they had planned to target the processions and a sizable quantity of explosive material and illicit weapons were found in their possessions. However, on Nov 23, 2011 all of them were exonerated except Aziz Ahmed, who reportedly went missing following his release from prison on bail. Initially, the court had granted bail to all the accused in 2008 due to lack of interest and persistent absence of the investigating officer and witnesses.

ASI Arif Hussain, sub-inspector Riaz Ahmed Gujjar, inspector Nasir Khan, inspector Mohammad Iqbal and IO inspector Mohammad Younus were the prosecution witnesses. But they remained absent from court for a long period despite many notices and warrants and eventually the IO and Arif Hussain turned up and recorded their statements in November 2011 while the prosecution left the remaining witnesses abandoned.

It is generally observed that in a sufficient number of cases the special investigation wings of police take no time to associate the suspects with banned outfits and involve them in cases of terrorisms.

But in most such cases suspects are produced before courts under the Arms Ordinance for carrying unlicensed weapons, encounters with police, or in some other minor offences, allowing them to be set free on bail.

The police and other law-enforcement agencies are not only bound under the law to arrest the criminals, but also to play their due role in taking them to task.

Merely arresting the suspects and linking them with banned militant groups will not bear fruit until the police produce solid evidence before court to prove their guilt.