KARACHI, Oct 30: The Sindh High Court appellate bench comprising Justice Qaiser Iqbal and Justice Syed Mehmood Alam Rizvi on Thursday reserved its judgment on the acquittal plea of two Harkatul Mujahideen activists sentenced to death by an anti-terrorism court.

Eleven French engineers and two other persons were killed in the May 2002 bomb attack near Sheraton Hotel in Karachi. An explosive-laden car was rammed into the bus carrying the French engineers.

Asif Zaheer and Mohammad Rizwan, stated to be members of the banned Harkatul Mujahideen group, were sentenced to death on June 30, 2003 by an anti-terrorism court, which found the activists to have masterminded the suicide bombing.

The convicts challenged the ATC verdict in the Sindh High Court.

During the final arguments on Thursday, Rizwan’s counsel, Mohammad Farooq, submitted to the appellate bench that there was no evidence against his client except for the confessional statement of a co-accused, who had mentioned the name of Bashir.

The prosecution claimed that Bashir was the alias of Rizwan. However, the confessional statement of an accused could not be used against a co-accused, he added.

He further submitted that a witness, Zafar Iqbal, did not assign any role of the accused during the identification parade and that the two eyewitnesses produced by the prosecution did not say in their statements that they had seen the accused at the scene of the crime. The lawyer requested the court to set aside the conviction order.

Representing Asif Zaheer, advocate M. R. Syed submitted that the prosecution was placing too much reliance on the confessional statement of his client, arguing that the statement was recorded with a delay of 24 days after the arrested of the appellants.

He told the bench that there was contradiction between the confessional statement and the prosecution’s story regarding the vehicle used in the blast.

The state counsel submitted to the bench that a witness, Zafar Iqbal, had seen the accused sitting in a vehicle that was used in the blast and had also identified the accused during the identification parade held in the court of a judicial magistrate.

The date for the pronouncement of order is to be fixed later.

Verdict on kidnap case today

An anti-terrorism court reserved its judgment on Thursday after recording final arguments from both sides in a factory owner’s kidnapping for ransom case.

Manzar Khan, the driver of the factory owner, Jalal Khan, Maqbool Ahmed and Habib-ur-Rahman were charged with kidnapping Jalaluddin Kiyani for ransom.

After the completion of final arguments from both sides, Judge Hasan Ali Bukhari of ATC-I reserved the judgment for Friday.

According to the prosecution, the accused kidnapped Jalaluddin and his driver, Manzar Khan, on March 30, 2007 in the Korangi Industrial Area police limits and demanded a ransom of Rs50 million for his release.

The captive himself negotiated a settlement with the kidnappers since none of his family members, except elderly parents, was present in the city.

The next day, the kidnappers released him and his driver on the understanding that he would arrange the ransom and send it through his driver.

The victim arranged the amount. However, in the meantime, he informed the police about the incident.

As he handed over Rs100,000 to his driver, a team of Anti-Violent Crime Cell secretly followed the driver and arrested him and seized the money. The other accused were also arrested in Neelum Colony, near Abdullah Shah Ghazi shrine, in Clifton.

Public Prosecutor Mohammad Khan Buriro submitted that the prosecution had provided sufficient evidence against the accused to prove their involvement in the case.

He said the victim had not only identified the accused during an identification parade held in the court, but also assigned their roles, adding that the prosecution produced the data of cellular companies which had shown that the accused called the mother of the victim to demand the ransom.

He further argued that the driver of the victim, Manzar Khan, had recorded his confessional statement at the police station and disclosed the whereabouts of his associates, who were later arrested. He said the prosecution had successfully proved its case. He requested the court to award due punishment to the accused.

The defence argued that there was no eyewitness account of the case while the prosecution story revealed that the ransom was not directly collected, which clearly reflected false implication of his clients in the case.

He appealed for the acquittal of the accused, arguing that the prosecution had failed to provide solid evidence against them.

According to the charge-sheet, Manzar Khan hatched the kidnapping plan and for this purpose got the help of his friends. But they released the victim after a settlement as they did not have a proper place to keep him.

A case (FIR No224/2007) was registered against the accused under Section 365-A of the Pakistan Penal Code and under Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997 on the complaint of the victim.

The prosecution produced eight witnesses in court.