KARACHI: The Sindh High Court on Monday upheld the death penalty handed down to a former district and sessions judge and his accomplice for the murder of the son of a fellow judge.

An antiterrorism court had sentenced former district and sessions judge (Mithi) Sikandar Lashari and Irfan Khan alias Fahim to death in August 2018 for murdering 19-year-old Aqib Shahani, son of his fellow district and sessions judge Khalid Hussain Shahani, in Hyderabad in February 2014 as his daughter was reportedly in love with the victim.

Both the convicts, through their lawyers, filed appeals against the judgement of the trial court and after hearing both the sides and examining the record and proceedings of the case, a two-judge appellate bench headed by Justice Mohammad Ali Mazhar dismissed the appeals and maintained the trial court’s verdict.

The bench observed that the guilt of both the appellants had been proved as the evidence including clear admission of guilt by the former district judge through a video statement secretly recorded in the office of a police officer and revelation of material and uncontroverted facts through call data record, which linked the former judge with killers, was providing all links and making out one straight chain of evidence against them.

It ruled that it had been unequivocally established that the former judge was the mastermind of the entire episode since he hired the killers to accomplish the job with an aim of satisfying his ego and vengeance.

Murder committed for so-called honour

The court observed that as the father of a young girl, he might have been annoyed after knowing the love affair of his daughter with the victim, but at the same time he was also a district and sessions judge and there must be a distinction between a common, or an uneducated person, and a district judge who was considered to be the custodian of law to dispense justice. He was in no way expected to take the law in his own hands.

“A notorious act of honour killing is branded as karo-kari which menace is cancerous and tumorous to our society, humanity and the populace. In fact this is an act of murder in which a person is killed for his or her actual or perceived immoral deeds and comportments,” the verdict said.

The bench in its judgement said that the video CD of a conversation between then SSP Pir Fareed Jan Sirhindi and Sikandar Lashari on March 22, 2014 at the former’s office was produced and examined in the trial court in which the former judge made various admissions including masterminding the incident and hired assassins to murder the victim.

For its satisfaction, “the judges have also seen the video footage very carefully and compared the statement with the transcript produced in Urdu language in trial court”, the verdict said, adding that the video did not demonstrate or indicate any coercion or compulsion rather the then district judge was sitting in a very comfortable and congenial manner and voluntarily talking to the SSP without any pressure while the voice and picture in CD did not seem to be tampered with or doctored.

“The picture-perfect video footage with clear soundtrack undoubtedly corroborates and substantiates with other available evidence that it was Sikandar Lashari who orchestrated and plan out the homicide of Aqib to quiet down and pacify his grudge and resentment. He made various admissions which are sufficient to prove his culpability if weigh down and mull over with the intrinsic value of evidence including CDR and messages data which all inspiring confidence,” it added.

The judgement further said that Sikandar Lashari in his statement recorded by the trial court said he was not informed that his statement was being recorded through camera while his lawyer argued that the video footage was tampered and it was also recorded on account of some inducement.

“Under the precepts and canons of Article 42 [Qanun-i-Shahadat Order 1984] deception is allowed to be practiced and any such confession is acceptable. The statement of Sikandar Lashari was recorded through deception practice and not through inducement as for recording confession through inducement; it does not give rise to the occasion that the accused should be unaware or unacquainted that his statement is being recorded. No alleged inducement was substantiated except that SSP on the request of Sikandar Lashari stated that he will try for compromise which can be viewed in the video statement and said statement is covered under deception practice permissible under Article 42 and not an inducement as provided under Article 37 which niceties are different with different consequences,” it added.

The bench further observed that it was clear that the appellant knew about the video statement and a USB containing voice data of his daughter with the victim’s mother from the inception of the trial as he had filed a criminal revision application in 2014 to assail an order passed by the trial court.

The bench also referred to a recent judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif and another order of the Supreme Court of India with regard to the admissibility of audio-video statement in evidence.

The trial court as well as the high court had dismissed the applications of appellant to transfer the case to a sessions court for trial.

As far as the role of appellant Irfan was concerned, all eyewitnesses deposed that he was the same person who pulled out Aqib from his car and folded his hands from the back and thereafter another person, Ghulam Abbas Siyal, absconder, fired at Aqib, it added.

According to the prosecution, Aqib, aka Kashif, was driving his car when gunmen in another vehicle intercepted and pulled him over on Thandi Sarak (Hyderabad) and sprayed him with bullets. His mother, two sisters and a cousin were with him in the car.

The former judge was charged with instigating the killing since the deceased was reportedly in love with one of his daughters, it added.

Published in Dawn, April 21st, 2020