Another two of the seven accused of the Sarfraz Shah murder case managed to hire lawyers of their choice before proceedings on Friday. But four others were handed lawyers chosen by an Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) on Friday for their defence, as hearing of the case entered its third day.
When ATC-I Judge Bashir Ahmed Khoso began hearing on Friday, he was informed that four of the accused – Sepoy Mohammad Tariq, Lance Naik Liaquat Ali, Shahid Zafar and Mohammad Afzal – have not been able to hire defence counsels. Since the deadline imposed by Khoso to hire legal representation had elapsed, the judge appointed a retired sessions judge, Abdul Mateen, as a defence lawyer to defend the four accused on state expense.
The other three –Sub-Inspector Bahaur Rehman, constables Mohammad Tariq and Mintar Ali – managed to hire counsels in time. Defence counsels of Sub-Inspector Bahaur Rehman and Manthar Ali, M.R. Syed and Naimat Ali pleaded with the court to adjourn hearing for seven days, but the judge also fixed June 28 as the date for framing charges against the six Rangers personnel and one employee of the park where Shah was murdered.
The accused are facing charges of killing Sarfraz Shah in the Clifton area on June 8. According to the prosecution, the deceased was murdered by Rangers personnel in a public park after he was handed over to them by a private contractor, Afsar Khan, accusing him of committing theft and looting. Television footage of Shah’s killing showed that the Rangers personnel shot the unarmed Shah twice, and after injuring him seriously, watched him bleed to death instead of shifting him to a hospital.
The police have charge-sheeted the arrested accused for deliberately murdering the deceased, submitting that the accused first caused injuries to deceased with their common intention and by the act of commission of omission they denied medical treatment to him, and he succumbed to his injuries due to excessive bleeding and lack of medical care. The prosecution has named 46 witnesses, including two eyewitnesses, in the charge sheet in addition to a list of 14 articles, including the crime weapon, to prove the guilt of the accused.
Consequently, a case (FIR 227/2011) under Sections 302 & 34 PPC was lodged against personnel visible in the video footage at the same police station on complaint of the victim’s brother Salik Shah, a reporter for a local news TV channel. Later, Section 7 of Anti-Terrorism Act 1997 was also incorporated in FIR.
