- ATC Islamabad on May 30 had sentenced 12 PTI members, including MNA Abdul Latif for attacking Ramna police station
- Prosecution fails to prove their presence at the scene of the protest based on witnesses’ accounts
ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday overturned a verdict of the Anti-Terrorism Court and acquitted four PTI members sentenced to 10 years imprisonment on charges of attacking a police station during the violent May 9 riots.
A divisional IHC bench, comprising Justice Azam Khan and Justice Khadim Soomro, heard the petition and acquitted the four convicts after the prosecution failed to prove their presence at the scene of the protest based on the witnesses’ accounts.
On May 30, the Anti-Terrorism Court in Islamabad had sentenced PTI MNA Abdul Latif and 11 other party members under various charges for attacking the Ramna police station Islamabad during the May 9 riots.
Following the verdict, the police took the four of the convicted members present in the court, namely Mira Khan, Muhammad Akram, Shahzeb, and Sohail Khan, into custody.
The convicts had been charged under Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) Sections 148 (rioting, armed with deadly weapon), 149 (unlawful assembly), 186 (obstructing official duty), 188 (disobeying order of a public servant), 324 (attempted murder), 353 (assault on public servants), 436 (arson) and 440 (mischief); Section 144 of CrPC; and Section 7 of the Anti Terrorism Act (ATA), 1997.
They were sentenced to 10 years imprisonment under Section 7 ATA, five years under Section 324 of PPC, four under Section 436, two each under sections 353 and 148.
Additionally, the convicts were sentenced to four years in prison and fined Rs40,000 for burning a motorcycle under Section 426 (punishment for mischief); and a separate sentence of four years in prison and a fine of Rs40,000 under Section 440 (mischief committed after preparation made for causing death or hurt) for vandalizing a police station.
A sentence of three months imprisonment was imposed for interfering in the work of the police under Section 186 (obstructing public servant in the discharge of public functions), one month for violating Section 144 (joining an unlawful assembly armed with a deadly weapon), and two years for committing a crime in a group under Section 149 (every member of an unlawful assembly guilty of an offense committed in prosecution of a common object).
The sentences were to run concurrently.
The hearing
PTI lawyer Babar Awan argued that out of the nine prosecution witnesses, only one witness—Assistant Sub-Inspector Muhammad Sharif—was able to identify the accused.
He said, “While it was alleged that the protesters had resorted to firing, no one was injured. The crime must be punished, but the system should not be made into a joke.”
Justice Soomro asked the prosecutor, Nasir Shah, to present the evidence. Shah said that the evidence had been collected but sought more time to present it before the court.
The bench said that if more time was required, then it should have been informed in advance, since now it had heard all the arguments.
It further said that no one was injured, adding that the prosecution should prove the presence of the accused at the scene.
The judges said that the witnesses’ statements did not include any mention that the accused were present at the scene. They questioned whether the court would now hand down sentences based on an identity parade.
Meanwhile, the prosecutor said, “What could be a greater act of terrorism than an attack on a police station?”
