Karachi ATC acquits two cops in fake encounter case for ‘lack of evidence’
KARACHI: An anti-terrorism court (ATC) has acquitted two policemen allegedly involved in the killing of a young man in a staged encounter in 2018.
Constables Uzair Ahmed and Abdul Qadir were charged with staging a ‘police encounter’ that resulted in the death of Shiraz Ahmed within the remits of the PIB Colony police station in November 2018.
The ATC-XIX judge, who conducted the trial in the Judicial Complex inside the Central Jail Karachi, ruled that the prosecution had failed to prove the charges against the accused persons.
The court directed the jail authorities to release Abdul Qadir if he was not required in any other case, and cancelled the surety bond of Uzair Ahmed who had appeared before the court on bail.
Another co-accused nominated in this case, Ataullah, who was on bail, passed away during the trial.
According to the prosecution, an FIR was registered by Nadra Parveen, mother of deceased Shiraz, stating that on the night of June 26, 2018, she was home when neighbours informed her that her son had been shot near Old Sabzi Mandi and shifted to the hospital. After reaching the hospital, she learnt that her son had passed away. When she arrived at the crime scene with police, she said, local people told her that her son had been thrown into a drain by police officers after an altercation and then shot, which caused him injuries, leading to death on way to the hospital.
In her statement, the complainant alleged that her son was shifted to the hospital three hours after being shot, adding that the police falsely claimed that her son was shot during a ‘fake police encounter’.
She had registered a case against three policemen at the PIB Colony police station under Section 302 (murder) and 34 (common intention) of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) read with Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act.
During the trial, the defence counsel for the accused, Abid Zaman and Osama Ali, argued that the mother of the deceased person had registered a case against their clients after a delay of three months.
They added that the prosecution produced a witness, Rubina, as an eyewitness, but she was ‘planted’ as neither the FIR nor the complainant mentioned that witness in their statements.
Published in Dawn, October 7th, 2024