Mother wages struggle for justice in Nazim Jokhio murder case
KARACHI: The Nazim Jokhio case took a dramatic turn on Saturday when his mother approached a sessions court and denied having reaching any out-of-court settlement over her son’s murder with an interned Pakistan Peoples Party lawmaker Jam Awais Bijar and others.
“It is most respectfully prayed in your honour that I did not compromise with the accused persons, as earlier filed compromise due to pressure/influence by the accused persons. Same may kindly be treated as null and void and same has been withdrawn by me,” stated the 52-year-old mother Jamiat in a an application filed through her counsel Mazhar Ali Junejo.
The mother’s application has been filed with the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge (Malir) Faraz Ahmed Chandio, who was set to formally indict the detained MPA Jam Awais and his nine servants/guards booked for allegedly kidnapping, abating and torturing to death Nazim Jokhio.
MPA Jam Awais along with his servants/guards — Haider Ali, Meer Ali, Muhammad Mairaj, Mohammad Saleem Salar, Mohammad Doda Khan, Ahmed Khan Shoro and Mohammad Soomar — has been booked and detained for murdering 26-year-old Nazim Jokhio at the MPA’s farmhouse in Malir.
Tells court no compromise reached with PPP lawmakers
On Saturday, the judge took up the matter to frame the charges against the suspects, when the Malir district prison’s superintendent instead of producing detained MPA filed a statement saying that the MPA could not be produced before the court as he was suffering from “high blood pressure symptomatic”.
Five suspects — Saleem Salar, Doda Khan, Mohammad Soomar, Mohammad Mairaj and Ahmed Khan Shoro — appeared on bail while two detained brothers Haider Ali and Meer Ali were produced from the prison.
Complainant Afzal Jokhio, a brother of the slain Nazim Jokhio, appeared in court and stated that Advocate Mazhar Ali Junejo was not his counsel.
In the meanwhile, Mr Junejo filed power of attorney on behalf of the mother of the deceased, Ms Jamiat.
The counsel also filed a statement supported by an affidavit signed by Ms Jamiat stating that she being a legal heir of the slain Nazim Jokhio did not compromise her son’s murder with the accused persons.
The mother clarified that an earlier out-of-the-court compromise purportedly filed in the court along with her son Afzal Jokio and the victim’s widow Shireen was due to “pressure/influence by the accused persons”.
Therefore, the mother asked the court that the “same may kindly be treated as null and void and same has been withdrawn by me”.
However, Ms Jamiat’s application was not taken up during the hearing.
The judge ordered that “due to non production of accused Jam Awais charge could not framed”.
He fixed the matter on Sept 24 for framing charges against them.
The judge issued the order to the prison authorities for production of MPA Jam Awais on the next date when all other suspects were also told to ensure their presence before the court.
In July this year, Judicial Magistrate (Malir) Altaf Tunio had discharged PPP MNA Jam Abdul Karim, Jamal Ahmed, Abdul Razaque, Muhammad Khan, Mohammad Ishaque and Atta Mohammad from the case over the ‘lack of evidence’ against them.
He had ruled that “grounds exist to believe that offence is committed. Therefore, cognizance is taken on the report for the offences under Sections 302 (premeditated murder), 201 (causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender), 365 (kidnapping), 506 (criminal intimidation), 109 (abetment) and 34 (common intention) of the Pakistan Penal Code”.
The magistrate sent the matter to the relevant sessions court for trial of the suspects.
He had ruled that held MPA’s nine servants/guards — Haider, Meer Ali, Mairaj, Doda Khan, Muhammad Soomar, Niaz Salar, Ahmed Shoro, Zahid and Mohammad Saleem — will also stand trial.
However, the magistrate had discharged from the case against MNA Jam Abdul Karim, the elder brother of Jam Awais, Abdul Razzaq, Muhammad Khan, Muhammad Ishaque, Atta Muhammad and Jamal due to ‘insufficient evidence’ against them.
Published in Dawn, September 11th, 2022