Ex-MNA Ali Raza Abidi’s 2018 killing was not terrorism, SHC rules

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) on Tuesday ruled that the 2018 targeted killing of former Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Pakistan (MQM-P) MNA Ali Raza Abidi did not meet the legal definition of terrorism, while reducing the life sentences of four appellants to the period they had already spent in prison.

A two-judge bench headed by Justice Omar Sial issued the order while deciding appeals filed by Muhammad Farooq, Muhammad Ghazali, Abu Bakar and Abdul Haseeb against the punishment handed down by an anti-terrorism court (ATC).

In April 2024, the ATC had sentenced the four men to life imprisonment for facilitating absconding suspects in the killing of the MQM-P leader, who was shot dead in December 2018 outside his home in Defence Housing Authority.

The high court acquitted the appellants of the terrorism charge and converted the life term awarded by the trial court into the sentence already undergone.

Court’s findings on terrorism charge

In its ruling, the bench said the appellants had been convicted for terrorism, but the prosecution had failed to place convincing material before the trial court to establish any intention or plan to coerce or intimidate the public or to create fear and insecurity in society.

The bench observed that the case concerned a targeted killing, but said investigators had never determined the motive behind the attack.

According to the judgment, the evidence relied upon against the appellants consisted of their extrajudicial confessions recorded by police in the presence of the complainant, along with call data record (CDR). "An extra-judicial confession is a weak piece of evidence and it must be corroborated and supported before it can form a part of admissible evidence," it noted.

The bench also noted that the alleged confessions were not admissible because none had been made before a judicial magistrate. It also said there were signs of unlawful force having been used during the arrests and subsequent detention of the appellants.

On the CDR, the court said it could be admitted as electronic evidence, but was generally regarded as circumstantial rather than definitive proof, particularly in the absence of call transcripts or voice recordings.

The judgment said the CDR had been obtained through the technical branch of the Counter-Terrorism Department (CTD) and was produced before the trial court on plain sheets.

Criticism of investigation

The SHC also delivered strong criticism of the police investigation into the case. "After having commented on the specifics of the case from a legal perspective and giving our observations on the evidence relied upon for the conviction, we would like to record that the Sindh Police failed completely in solving and proving this case," it stated.

The bench said the alleged actual shooters, Bilal and Hasnain, had disappeared and that police had offered no explanation about them. It further observed that no effort had been made to apprehend the shooters and that important leads, including a bullet match with a pistol in an earlier case, had been ignored.

The court also said no attempt was made to have the confessions recorded before a magistrate, and added that there appeared to have been a deliberate effort to avoid presenting the CDR in a professional, complete and lawful manner.

"The police have some brilliant and brave investigators. What compelled the police to conduct a weak investigation in this very high-profile case must necessarily be looked into by the inspector general. People’s faith in the police must not be tarnished," it noted.

The bench asked the inspector general of police to examine what had led to what it described as a weak investigation in such a high-profile matter.