Abduction Cases

January 11, 2002 Friday Shawwal 26, 1422
KARACHI: 1,745 abduction cases reported last year
KARACHI, Jan 10: As many as 1745 cases of abduction of women and children were reported
all over Pakistan last year.
There were 1193 cases of women kidnapping, 266 cases of female child abduction and 286 cases
of male child abduction.
Despite these enormous figures, the fact remains that crimes against children and women
continue to be under-reported in the country.
The statistics were compiled by Madadgaar, a joint venture of the Lawyers for Human Rights
and Legal Aid (LHRLA) and UNICEF.
Out of recognized 1193 women kidnapping cases, 59 were published in the month of January; in
February 58, in March 76, in April 113, in May 108, in June 89, in July 114, in August 130, in
September 126, in October 141, in November 88, and in December 91 cases were reported,
In many reported cases, the perpetrator was known to the victim; he was either an acquaintance,
a neighbour, a relative, a friend, family friend or a stranger. In some very significant cases the
kidnapper was a policeman, in other cases the kidnapper was a dacoit, husband, wadera or
jagirdar (feudal lord), peer, faqir (spiritual leader), maulvi, shopkeeper, pimp or trafficker.
During the year 286 cases of male child abduction were reported. Of these reported cases 15
were in acknowledged in January; 7 in February, 13 in March, 15 in April, 31 in May, 27 in
June, 23 in July, 47 in August, 28 in September, 31 in October, 20 in November and 29 cases of
male child abduction were published in December 2001.
According to a news report published in The Observer, Washington, at least 30 boys a month are
being kidnapped from Pakistan to feed the banned slave trade in racing camel jockeys in the
United Arab Emirates.
During the year 266 cases of female child kidnapping were reported all over the country. Out of
these, 8 cases were acknowledged on January, 8 in February, 6 in March, 6 in April, 15 in May,
15 in June, 32 in July, 34 in August, 29 in September, 52 in October, 25 in November and 36
cases were reported in December.
Cases of the kidnapping of children and women were rampant in the Punjab and Sindh. During
the last twelve months 851 cases of abduction of women and children were reported in the
Punjab; 794 cases in Sindh, 51 in the NWFP and 49 cases of kidnapping were acknowledged by
the print media.
January 19, 2002 Saturday Ziqa'ad 4, 1422

KARACHI, Jan 18: Three police officials, aggrieved by an order of the administrative
judge, Anti-Terrorism Court, for directing the trial court to take action against them under
section 27 of the ATA Act in a kidnapping-for-ransom case (218/201), have filed revision
application in the Sindh High Court.
The ATA appellate bench, comprising Justice Ghulam Nabi Soomro and Justice
Ghulam Rabbani, ordered issuance of notice for Monday, when the matter came up on
Friday.
The applicants, represented by Khwaja Naved Ahmed advocate, have prayed for calling
of record and proceedings of the above mentioned case from the court of the special
judge, Anti- Terrorism Court No II, who had issued show cause notices to them prior to
holding of trial and recording evidence.
The applicants are Chaudhary Anwar Ali Punno, subdivisional police officer,
Liaquatabad; Afaq Ahmed, SHO Sharifabad, and SI Ejaz Ahmed posted at the
Sharifabad police station.
The matter pertains to the complaint of Abdul Majeed, lodged at the Sharifabad police
station, about abduction of his three-year-old daughter, Ramsha, by unknown persons
on Nov 13, 2001. Subsequently, the police had arrested three persons — Zahid, Faisal
and Urooj.
During investigation, Zahid had confessed the crime but his wife Urooj was found to be
innocent. According to the police she had acted under the pressure of her husband and
did not share the common intention with the other co-accused.
The police, accordingly, submitted the report under section 169 CrPC before the
administrative judge.
February 3, 2002 Sunday Ziqa’ad 19, 1422
KARACHI: Daniel Pearl remains traceless
By Our Staff Reporter
KARACHI, Feb 2: Police on Friday night and Saturday thoroughly searched all the well-known
cemeteries in the city and its suburban areas after they received an electronic message that the
American journalist, Daniel Pearl, had been killed and his body dumped in a cemetery.
Sources in police said they had carried out an overnight extensive search in all cemeteries in the
city and its outskirts, but they had not found any dead body dumped there, which strengthened
the hope that Daniel was alive. “We searched the cemeteries again in daylight, but we have
found no dead body dumped in any of the cemeteries,” a senior police official said.
The sources said a caller, who had rang up the US embassy in Islamabad and demanded two
million US dollars in ransom besides asking for the release of Mulla Zaeef and 25 others, had
been traced and picked up for investigation. However, the DIG Karachi (Operation), Tariq Jamil,
denied any such arrest, saying that no such suspect was in police custody.
A senior official said one of the suspects in the case, Pir Mubarak Shah Gilani, had been
interrogated by the Karachi police and other law-enforcement agencies. A team of the Federal
Investigation Bureau (FBI) of the USA had also interrogated Gilani, the official said. But police
did not get any substantive information from Gilani, which could help make any breakthrough in
the case.
Police had also picked up the driver of Mubarak Shah and another man associated with him in
Mansehra, NWFP, and brought them to Karachi for interrogation, the police official said.
He said police had verified the calls received on the mobile phone, which was in the use of
Daniel Pearl, and some of the suspicious calls had been identified. When the mobile phone, from
which calls were made to Daniel, were verified from the companies concerned, it came to light
that the mobile phone had been issued on a fake name and address. The mobile phone, which
was in the use of Daniel, had also been issued in the name of some other person.
Police had raided a place in Karachi from where the electronic message was sent to The Wall
Street Journal, and strict surveillance was being maintained at the place to keep a watch on the
movement of the suspected persons, the police official said.
“Police have also deployed their persons in plain clothes at that place, but no arrest has so far
been made,” he added. He did not identify the place for reason of secrecy of investigation.
Another electronic mail originated from Lahore, the senior police official said.
He said an e-mail account could easily be created in a fake name and with a fake identity. The
suspects created a new account to send their electronic mail for one time only as they did not use
it again, which was proving a hurdle in the way of tracing them out.
“All information about the kidnapping of Daniel Pearl is coming out of electronic messages
being received by the media. The kidnappers have not contacted Daniel’s wife, the local police
or the government,” he said, adding that the motive for the kidnapping was still not known as the
e-mail messages contradicted one another, which showed that either the kidnappers were
themselves confused or they wanted to confuse the investigators.
February 6, 2002 Wednesday Ziqa’ad 22, 1422
KARACHI: Daniel Pearl issue may soon be resolved

KARACHI, Feb 5: Governor Sindh Mohammedmian Soomro said on Tuesdaythat the issue of
the kidnapping of American journalist Daniel Pearl would soon be resolved as the law enforcing
agencies had made progress in the case.
Talking to the newsmen at the Kashmir Solidarity Day function of the city government here, he
said the wait for the solution of the case would not be long now as the investigating forces had
some clues to the kidnappers.
Replying to a question, he said that five to six more suspects had been nabbed and it was
expected that some clue to the kidnappers would come out of their interrogation.
He added that the investigation agencies were thrashing the records of mobile phone calls to
ascertain the links of the telephone calls made by the suspects. — APP
February 12, 200 2 Tuesday Ziqa’ad 28, 1422
KARACHI: Judge declines remand for want of jurisdiction : Daniel Pearl case
By Our Reporter
KARACHI, Feb 11: Differing interpretations of the recent amendment to the Anti-terrorism Act
of 1997, regarding reconstitution of the ATCs, stood in the way of the Karachi police in
obtaining physical remand from Justice Shabbir Ahmed of the Sindh High Court on Monday of
the three suspects in the kidnapping case of Daniel Pearl.
Foreign electronic media had swarmed the High Court since morning in the hope that police
would bring the three suspects, Salman Saqib, Fahd and Adil Shaikh, to obtain their remand in
the high-profile kidnapping case of the Wall Street Journal journalist Daniel Pearl from Justice
Ahmed who, before the amendment, also functioned as administrative judge of the ATCs.
The three accused were arrested in Gulistan-i-Jauhar for their alleged involvement in sending e-
mail messages containing the abducted journalist’s pictures in captivity, allegedly on the
instruction of the prime suspect, Shaikh Omar Saeed.
Amid long wait and see on Monday, around 4pm the SSP Police Investigation- II, Manzoor
Ahmed Mughal, along with Advocate-General Sindh Raja Qureshi, appeared before Justice
Ahmed in his chambers for obtaining remand of the three accused.
The accused were, nevertheless, not produced in the court. Khwaja Naveed Ahmed, counsel for
one of the accused, Fahd, was also asked to appear in the chamber.
If the government is able to convince Justice Ahmed on jurisdiction point, then the accused are
expected to be produced before him for remand on Tuesday.
According to Khawaja Naveed, Justice Ahmed asked the AG Sindh to satisfy him on the
jurisdiction point in view of the amendment. Justice Ahmed wanted to be satisfied by the AG
whether he was still administrative judge for the ATCs in Karachi, after the amendment.
The AG submitted various law points and contended that he could grant remand as new ATCs
had not been constituted yet, and till their constitution he would work as administrative judge.
Justice Ahmed asked the AG to come on Tuesday with a copy of the notification.
In the notification of the amendment, which became effective “at once,” according to clause 5 of
the amendment, “on the reconstitution of the Anti- Terrorism Courts under this section, the Anti-
Terrorism Courts existing immediately before the commencement of the Anti-Terrorism
(Amendment) Ordinance 2002, shall stand abolished and all cases pending before such courts
shall stand transferred and assigned to reconstituted courts having territorial jurisdiction under
the direction and supervision of Chief Justices of High Court concerned.”
In the amended order there is no mention of the administrative judge, which had caused the
question of jurisdiction.
Khwaja Naveed later told newsmen that since Justice Ahmed did not assume jurisdiction, he
could not present his client’s case. He said he held the view that Justice Ahmed had no
jurisdiction in the matter.
He told reporters that, according to law, police were responsible to produce any accused in a
court of law within 24 hours after arrest, but this had not been done in the case of the three
accused. “We don’t know the detail of the FIR and under what sections they have been held,” he
said.
Daniel Pearl has been missing since Jan 23 and police believe some persons illegally detained
him when he went to meet them. His wife had lodged a report at Artillery Maidan police station.
The amendment to the ATA has become controversial following the government’s decision to
induct serving military officer into the restructured anti- terrorism courts.
Through the amendment to the ATA Ordinance of 2002 the government has provided for three-
member anti-terrorism courts in country.
The legal fraternity has held that the ordinance is also in direct conflict with the judgments of the
apex court in the case of Shaikh Liaquat Husain and Mehram Ali and certainly in excess of the
extra-constitutional departure condoned by the Supreme Court in Zafar Ali Shah case.
February 13, 2002 Wednesday Ziqa’ad 29, 1422

KARACHI: Suspects remanded in Pearl case
By Our Reporter
KARACHI, Feb 12: Justice Shabbir Ahmed of the Sindh High Court remanded on Tuesday the
three suspects in the kidnapping of the Wall Street Journal’s journalist Daniel Pearl in police
custody for 14 days, after the controversy over jurisdiction was resolved following submissions
by the Sindh advocate-general.
On Monday Justice Ahmed had declined to accord remand on the point that the amended
ordinance 2002, pertaining to the Anti-terrorism Act, had come into force “at once” whereupon
he had ceased to be the administrative judge of the anti-terrorism courts at Karachi, and he could
not grant remand. He had given the Advocate-General, Raja Qureshi, one day to satisfy him on
the point of jurisdiction and to produce notification of his appointment as administrative judge.
Foreign electronic media swarmed the court premises when about 10:30 in the morning the
suspects, Salman Saqib, Fahd and Adil Shaikh, were brought to the High Court handcuffed and
their faces covered, amid tight security in police mobiles. Senior police officials, including the
investigation officer, Hamidullah, accompanied them. They were soon ushered into the chamber
of the judge, followed by Khwaja Naveed Ahmed, counsel for one of the accused.
When the matter came up before Justice Ahmed, the AG produced the notification and relied
upon article 246 (e) of the constitution which envisaged the effect of repeal of law.
His further contention was that by operation of law and section 6 of the General Clauses Act, till
such time the reconstituted courts were notified, the administrative judge would continue to be
invested with the powers of granting remand.
The main thrust of the AG was, that no forum was available, and if no remand was accorded to
the investigating agency, the recovery of the “hostage” would become impossible, confessional
statement would not be recorded, identification parade would not be held and recovery of other
incriminating materials would not be possible.
This particular section also states that “and any such investigation, legal proceeding or remedy,
my be instituted, continued or enforced and any such penalty, forfeiture or punishment may be
imposed as if the repealing Act or regulation had not been passed.”
Justice Ahmed examined the effect of repeal, with the assistance of the advocate-general, who
had contended that repeal would not affect any investigation, legal proceeding or remedy in
respect of any such right, privilege, obligation, liability, penalty, forfeiture or punishment and
any such investigation, legal proceedings or remedy might be instituted, continued or enforced
on the basis of clause (e) of article 264 of the constitution.
Justice Ahmed, in his order as administrative judge of the ATCs, held that “since the matter is
under investigation and the investigation cannot be conducted unless police remand of the
accused is granted for the purpose of investigation, a vacuum cannot be allowed to creep.
Therefore, I am of the view that this court can grant remand in spite of repeal of the provisions
till reconstitution of the Anti-terrorism court is duly notified.”
After the jurisdiction issue was resolved, Justice Ahmed inquired from the IO what was the
charge against the three persons. The IO disclosed that they had sent e- mails which they had
themselves admitted. Fahd was arrested at 11:30am on Feb 11, Salman Saqib about 1:30am, and
Adil at 4:30am on Feb 12.
The accused were asked one by one whether they were maltreated by police during police
custody. All of them, in the presence of Khwaja Naveed, counsel for one of them, stated that
they had not been maltreated. One of the accused, Salman Saqib, was limping. He had stated that
it was due to a gunshot injury sustained by him about two and a half years ago.
The three accused were arrested in Gulistan-i-Jauhar for their alleged involvement in sending e-
mail messages containing the abducted journalist’s pictures in captivity, allegedly on the
instructions of the prime suspect, Shaikh Omar Saeed. Their arrest was in connection with the
abduction of Daniel Pearl, under FIR No 24/2002 which was registered on Feb 4 at Artillery
Maidan police station under section 365-A of PPC.
The complainant, Daniel’s wife, complained that certain e-mail messages, including pictures of
her husband, were received by her and that her husband was being kept in inhuman conditions.
February 15, 2002 Friday Zilhaj 2, 1422
KARACHI: Police believe Pearl is alive
KARACHI, Feb 14: Recovery of the kidnapped US journalist Daniel Pearl is a matter of a
couple of days, the provincial police chief Kamal Shah told a press conference on Thursday.
“We are fully satisfied with the way and the pace of investigation and all involved in the
kidnapping will be arrested. It is impossible to give out a timeframe. However, we will be able to
recover him in a couple of days and it could be a little longer than expected,” he said.
Commenting on a statement of the key suspect Omar Shaikh in the court earlier in the day who
had stated that “as far as I understand, he is dead”, the provincial police chief said his (Omar’s)
statement was not substantiated by the evidence which the police had collected. He said that
earlier during investigation Omar had claimed Pearl was alive.
He said after the court proceedings, Omar was questioned again and he had no idea as to who
had killed Pearl and where his body had been dumped.
When a reporter told Mr Shah that Omar had told the court that he had surrendered himself to the
police on Feb 5 to save his family from harassment, the IG said Omar’s every statement could
not be believed as he had tried to mislead the investigators by giving inconsistent statements.
Only that statement could be believed which was substantiated by the evidence. He said Omar
had been arrested on Feb 12, taken to Islamabad first and then flown to Karachi as there had
been no flight from Lahore to Karachi on that day.
He said Daniel Pearl, went missing on Jan 23, had not lived in Karachi and he had no contacts,
which was the major hindrance to trace him and investigate the case. He said the best
intelligence officers along with Citizen-Police Liaison Committee were investigating the case.
The police had arrested three suspects earlier who had sent two e-mails containing photographs.
The contents of the e-mail had been provided personally by Omar Shaikh to them. Confusion
was created when false e-mails were sent to the media. The captors did not communicate except
through the two e-mails.
He said: “We are interrogating Omar Shaikh and he is retracting his statements again and again.
He is a hard nut to # crack as he is a clever, intelligent and educated.” It was a complicated case
and the police were dealing with sufficiently trained suspects, he added.
He said: “We have four accused in custody. Omar Shaikh is being interrogated and he has not
provided us a substantial clue to the captors of Daniel Pearl so far. It will take some time to break
him.”
About the role of the Federal Bureau of Investigation into the investigation, Kamal Shah said:
“We are handicapped as far as technical equipment is concerned. The FBI has provided us the
technical assistance” as they had experience in dealing with cyber crime.” However, he did not
elaborate what he meant by “technical assistance”.
KARACHI, Feb 14: Another suspect in the kidnapping of the US reporter Daniel Pearl
was taken into custody in the city on Thursday, well-placed sources in the police said.
The sources said five suspects were taken into custody in New Karachi and Buffer Zone
in a murder case of a 40-year-old doctor, Syed Rashid Mehdi. The doctor was shot
dead near Faizur Rehman Hospital in Orangi Town on the night of Feb 12 by two
unidentified motorcyclists.
During interrogation, one of the suspects, identified as Asif, disclosed some clues in the
kidnapping of Daniel Pearl, the sources said and added that the suspect was being
interrogated and some more clues were expected from him. However, the sources did
not disclose the details of investigation.
A senior police official confirmed the custody of the suspect in Daniel Pearl case.
KARACHI: Suspect owns up to sending e-mail: Pearl case
By Tahir Siddiqui
KARACHI, Feb 21: One of the suspects in the Daniel Pearl kidnapping case confessed on
Thursday before a judicial magistrate that prime suspect Shaikh Umer had asked him to send the
e-mail about the kidnapping of the US journalist.
In his confessional statement before the magistraial court, Fahad Naseem, an employee at a cyber
cafe, disclosed that his cousin, Salman Saqib, had introduced him to the prime suspect, who had
assigned him the task of sending messages and photograph through e-mail.
His attorney, Khawaja Naveed, who was allowed by Judicial Magistrate Irum Jahangir to go
through the confessional statement of the suspect, told reporters that the role of his client was
confined only to the sending of the e-mail messages.
He said according to the confessional statement his client had met Shaikh Umer on Jan 21 at a
house in Karachi, where he had also seen a man, Qasim, and an unknown bearded man. He said
the prime suspect had wanted him to send some e-mails.
The suspect revealed that later Salman had got Rs175,000 changed from a money changer near
the Karachi Stock Exchange and they had bought a camera from a shop near Reagal Chowk in
Saddar.
Fahad said he had asked Shaikh Umer as to why they had kidnapped the US journalist when he
(the Shaikh) had given him the messages for e-mail. He also stated that the prime suspect had
also asked him not to ask questions as it could invite problem for him.
He said Shaikh Umer had later told him that they had kidnapped the US journalist because he
was a Jew and was working against Islam.
Referring to Fahad’s statement, the defence counsel said it was an “exculpatory type”
confession. “Such type of confession has no evidentiary value as it was made 14 days after the
arrest of the suspect.”
The counsel, referring to the confession, said that his client had never seen the abducted
journalist. “Nor did he know the whereabouts of the abductee”, he said.
Answering a question, he said his client would not become an approver in the case.
The 21-year-old suspect, clad in a white shalwar-qameez, was brought with his face muffled to
the City court premises amid extraordinary security around 12:50pm.
The suspect, still muffled, was brought out from the court around 2:37pm and was taken away in
an armoured personnel carrier.
Hundreds of policemen, supervised by dozens of officers, had taken positions at different points
on the premises of the city courts since morning. The cops did not allow any motorcycle or
automobile inside the court premises.
Several policemen were put on guard on the rooftops, while many others were deployed on the
stairs, leading to the court of Judicial Magistrate Irum Jahangir on the third floor.
A large number of litigants and lawyers waited in the open for the whole day as they were not
allowed to get any close to the court of the judicial magistrate.
Several lawyers were also seen exchanging hot words with the deployed policemen.
February 23, 2002 Saturday Zilhaj 10, 1422
KARACHI: Pearl’s widow ‘satisfied’ with investigation
KARACHI, Feb 22: Federal law minister Barrister Shahida Jameel said on Friday the widow of
Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl has expressed “full satisfaction” over the investigation
being conduct by the Pakistani authorities.
Talking to a group of journalists after visiting Mrs Pearl at the residence of Asra Naumani,
another staffer of the WSJ, the minister said she had come to visit Mrs Pearl on behalf of the
president.
Barrister Shahida said the widow of the US journalist and a representative of the WSJ praised the
efforts made by the police to resolve the case.
She said such incidents did occur in the past and the present government was giving top priority
to contain terrorism.
The minister said Mrs Pearl thanked the government for its support and for taking utmost interest
in the matter. “Mrs Pearl expressed complete satisfaction over the course of investigation,” she
added.
Sindh home secretary Mukhtar Ahmed and provincial police chief Syed Kamal Shah were also
present on the occasion.
Earlier, police did not allow the journalists to enter even the lane
leading to the residence of the WSJ staffer. The minister on her
way back was intercepted by a team of Pakistan Television.
To a question, the IGP said the police knew the captors and soon they would make a
breakthrough.
He said the course of investigation was too complicated as the culprits never made phone calls
and confined themselves to the use of e-mail.
To another question, the IGP said the force of merely 24,000 police personnel was not sufficient
for Karachi, which has the population of over 13 million.
February 26, 2002 Tuesday Zilhaj 13, 1422
KARACHI: Court extends remand of suspects in Pearl case
By Our Reporter
KARACHI, Feb 25: The prime suspect in the Daniel Pearl case, Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh, and
two others told the Administrative Judge of the anti- terrorism courts on Monday that police had
forcibly obtained their signatures on blank papers, while police obtained their further remand for
14 days, till March 12.
Justice Shabbir Ahmed in his order directed police not to coerce the accused for obtaining
confessions nor signatures on blank papers during custody.
Ahmad Omar Saeed Shaikh, Mohammed Salman and Mohammed Adil were brought to the
Sindh High Court amid tight security with their faces muffled with white cloth, to obtain their
further remand from Justice Shabbir Ahmed, who is also the Administrative Judge of the anti-
terrorism courts.
Police have made out a case under sections 365/A/302/109/34 PPC FIR 24/2002 read with
sections 7 (a) 8 (a) (b) (c) 11/A (a) (b) (c) 6 (2) (a) (b) (c) (e) (f), 11/H (324) 11/V (1) (a) (b) (2)
11/L (a) (b) 6/7 A (b) (c) (e) 11/H-2/ (a) 2 (b) 11/w (1) (2) 17 of ATA.
The suspects were taken to the chamber of Justice Ahmed, as hundreds of policemen lined up in
the corridor to make way for the accused.
Afterwards Raja Qureshi, the Advocate-General Sindh, who was accompanied by the SP
investigations II, Manzoor Mughal, and the investigation officer, told newsmen that police
obtained a further remand for 14 days under sub-section 5 of section 19 of the amended ATA
laws.
The police remand had been obtained to enable them to find the dead body of Daniel Pearl and
recover weapons, he said. Answering a question, he said it would not be an indefinite process.
He claimed that the prosecution had discovered a new piece of evidence but did not present it
today before the Administrative Judge. It would be presented in the final challan, he said.
He claimed that the suspects told the Administrative Judge that they were not manhandled or
tortured during custody.
While granting the remand, Justice Ahmed in his order said one of the accused, Ahmed Omar
Shaikh, had stated that during custody police had been pressured to obtain his confession and his
signature on blank paper which had been obtained. So was the statement of the two other
accused.
Justice Ahmed in his order also directed police not to coerce the accused and not to obtain their
signatures on blank paper during the remand.
Khawaja Naveed Ahmed, counsel for Salman and Adil, told newsmen after police obtained
remand that Omar Shaikh, who was composed and calm, told Justice Ahmed that “he has been in
police custody for 20 days and now they are seeking my signatures for extracting my confession,
which I do not want to make. Yesterday I was forced to sign blank papers.” The other two
accused complained of the same, he said.
The prime suspect in the Daniel Pearl kidnapping case, Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh, had on Feb
14 stated before an ATC judge that as far as he understood the US journalist was dead.
He had also stated that “I did kidnap him,” adding: “I don’t want to defend the case.”
Khawaja Naveed told newsmen that police had shown Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh, Syed Salman
Saqib, Mohammed Adil and Fahad Naseem in custody. Fahad has been remanded in jail custody
after recording his section 164 statement.
The names of the absconders are Amjad Husain Farooqi alias Hyder Farooqi alias Hasan
Mansoor, Asim alias Qasim, Hashim alias Arif, Hasan, Imtiaz Siddiqui, Ahmed Bhai and an
unknown person who took photographs of Daniel Pearl in captivity with camera and sent these
through e-mail to the international media.
The accused, who were handcuffed and hooded, were brought to the Sindh High Court about
1:30pm in an armoured personnel carrier of Garden police station. They were produced before
Justice Shabbir Ahmed in his chamber about 1:40pm and taken back about 1:55pm.
Later on, Mohammed Saleem, elder brother of accused Shaikh Mohammed Adil, and his mother
complained that police were not letting them to meet the accused. According to them, about
2:20am on Feb 5 plainclothes men, armed with Kalashnikov rifles, jumped into their house in
North Karachi and took Adil away. They went to Buffer Zone police station but could not get
any information. On Feb 6 they came to know of his arrest in the case through newspaper
reports.
Adil’s brother said the accused, who had been associated with the Special Branch of police for
13 years, had never taken bribe, and he had been associated with Jihad for about two years.
Salman Saqib, Fahad and Adil Shaikh, who have been linked with the high- profile kidnapping
case of Wall Street Journal journalist Daniel Pearl were arrested in Gulistan-i-Jauhar for their
alleged involvement in sending e-mail messages containing the abducted journalist’s pictures in
captivity, allegedly on the instruction of the prime suspect, Shaikh Omar Saeed.
February 27, 2002 Wednesday Zilhaj 14, 1422
KARACHI: Witness identifies Omar Shaikh in court
KARACHI, Feb 26: The prime suspect in US journalist Daniel Pearl kidnapping and murder
case, Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh, was on Tuesday identified by a prosecution witness during
identification parade held before the Judicial Magistrate Karachi South, Ms Erum Jehangir.
During the identification parade, no one, including the court staff, was permitted to come into the
office of the magistrate.
Omar Shaikh was brought to the court handcuffed and hooded by officials of the Investigation-II
police Karachi after court time. Police had blocked all passages leading to the court of the JM
Karachi South situated on the second floor on the City Courts premises.
The court sources identified the prosecution witness as Asif. He is stated to be an Islamabad-
based journalist who arranged a meeting between Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl and
Omar Shaikh in Islamabad in January.—PPI
March 2, 2002 Saturday Zilhaj 17, 1422

KARACHI: Another accused records statement: Daniel Pearl case
KARACHI, March 1: Judicial magistrate Karachi, South, Ms Erum Jehangir, on Friday recorded
the confessional statment of another accused in the U.S. journalist Daniel Pearl’s abduction and
murder case.
The accused, Syed Salman Saqib, was produced before the court amid tight security at about
11:15 am. He was wearing shalwar kamez and his face was covered with a peace of white cloth.
His confessional statement ended at about 1:10 pm and he was sent to jail in an armoured
personnel carrier of the Pak Colony police station at about 1:20 pm.
According to the prosecution, the accused acted as a contact between the main accused Ahmed
Omar Shaikh and the co-accused Fahad Naseem who allegedly sent emails regarding the
abduction of Daniel Pearl.
No details were available regarding the confessional statement. However, the counsel for the
accused, Khwaja Naveed Ahmed, told newsmen in the premises of the City Courts that the
accused had perhaps stated his role in the crime.
According to Khwaja Naveed Ahmed, the magistrate had refused to supply to him and the police
the copies of the confessional statement and directed him to get the copies of the statements of
the accused Fahad and Salman from the trial court, on the beginning of the trial.
“This time the magistrate did not allow me to read the statement saying that I had disclosed the
confessional statement of the accused Fahad Nasim to the media”, he said.
The defence counsel also stated that the accused had complained to the magistrate that he was
not feeling well due to his old injuries. The magistrate ordered the jail authorities to provide the
accused with all basic medical facilities. She also directed Khwaja Naveed to file an application
before the administrative judge of the Anti-Terrorism Courts regarding the medical treatment of
the accused.
Khwaja Naveed said that Salman had been in custody since February 11, 2002, while his
statement was recorded now. He added that any statement made after such a long period had no
value.
The administrative judge for the ATCs on February 25, 2002, had extended the police remand of
three accused, Salman Saqib, Shaikh Muhammad Adil and Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh, till
March 12, 2002.
The fourth arrested accused, Fahad Nasim, had earlier recorded his confessional statement.—
PPI/APP
March 6, 2002 Wednesday Zilhaj 21, 1422

KARACHI: Experts say...Police have no substantive evidence in Daniel case
KARACHI, March 5: Police have, so far, not made any substantive progress in their efforts to
arrest the killers of American journalist Daniel Pearl.
Although police and the government have taken the videotape as genuine in which the US
reporter is shown being slaughtered, section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code has not been
appended to the FIR 24/2002 dated Feb 5, registered at Artillery Maidan police station under
section 365-A read with section 7-A of the Anti-terrorism Act.
Dawn interviewed a number of senior police officials and prosecutors, including those engaged
in the investigation of Daniel Pearl’s kidnapping and killing case. They were of the view that
police did not have substantive evidence about the killing of Daniel Pearl which could be
produced in a court of law.
They said section 364 of PPC should be applied, instead of section 365-A of the ATA
(kidnapping for ransom), to the case. They said technically Daniel Pearl was not kidnapped but
he went somewhere to meet someone of his own free will where he was made captive. If a
person went of his own free will to meet someone somewhere and there he was confined illegally
and there were apprehensions that he might have been killed, then section 364 of PPC could be
applied. If the person was killed then section 302 of PPC could be applied, the senior officials
said.
They said police had not found the body or remains of Daniel Pearl, nor had they recovered the
weapon used in the killing. Also, police had not identified the place where the movie had been
shot and where the incident took place.
They expressed the opinion that the content of the videotape was also of doubtful nature as this
could be fictitious, and only this evidence could not be used in a court of law to substantiate the
claim of the prosecution that Daniel Pearl had been killed, they added.
They said it could well be argued that if the killers could send a videotape showing Daniel’s
killing, they could also send an electronic mail informing law-enforcement agencies about his
dead body. Without the recovery of body dead or its remains, the death of a person remained
doubtful in the eyes of law, they maintained.
The FIR, on the complaint of Marianne Pearl, wife of Daniel Pearl, reporter of the Wall Street
Journal, was registered on Feb 5. Police arrested three suspects, Salman Saquib, Shaikh Adil and
Fahd Naseem, for their alleged involvement in sending an e-mail message containing Daniel
Pearl’s photographs in captivity, on Feb 5.
Police showed the arrest of the key suspect, British-born Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh, on Feb 12
in Punjab, but the suspect claimed in a court that he had offered himself for arrest on Feb 5.
A seat in the name of Daniel Pearl on a PIA flight, PK-757C, for London was reserved on Feb 4,
which was later cancelled on the passenger’s request on Feb 8. Police received a videotape
through the US Consulate in Karachi on Feb 21 in which Daniel Pearl is shown being killed.
KARACHI: Plea against Omar’s extradition disposed of
By Our Reporter
KARACHI, March 5: The constitutional petition, filed by wife of Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh,
prime suspect in the Daniel Pearl case, seeking a restraining order against his extradition, was on
Tuesday disposed of by a division bench of the Sindh High Court, comprising Justice Ghulam
Rabbani and Justice Zia Pervez.
Sadia Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh had filed the petition, through K. M. A. Samdani, for a writ of
mandamus against the respondents, restraining them from surrendering the petitioner’s husband
to the US authorities or any other foreign authority and from sending the petitioner’s husband
abroad without his consent.
The secretaries of interior and foreign affairs and the Sindh home secretary were made
respondents. Notices were issued to the deputy attorney general and the advocate-general, Sindh.
When the matter came up, counsel for respondents submitted before the court that “if
respondents decide to deliver the husband of the petitioner to the officers or authorities of a
foreign country, he will be delivered without any contravention of the law of the land”.
After this statment, the bench in its order held that “in view of the statment made on behalf of the
government, the learned counsel for the petitioner signifies his satisfaction and does not press his
petition. Petition stands disposed of accordingly, along with the listed application.”
On Feb 25, the police had obtained extension in remand of the prime suspect until March 12 for
enabling it to trace the body of Daniel Pearl and recover weapons. On that date the detainee,
along with two others, had told the administrative judge for the anti-terrorism courts that the
police had forcibly obtained signatures on blank papers.
The petitioner had claimed that the London-born detainee was a citizen of Pakistan whose
passport had been surrendered to the IGP Punjab. The petitioner and the detainee are parents of a
three-month old baby.
It was the case of the petitioner that the detainee had nothing to do either with the kidnapping of
Denial Pearl or his reported killing or any other crime for that matter.
As soon as the detainee learnt that he was wanted by the police, he surrendered himself on Feb 5
to the IGP Punjab in the presence of the Punjab home secretary and DIG Police, Lahore range,
the petitioner had maintained.
As a student, the detainee visited Bosnia and Ethiopia with the aid convoys of Mercy, an NGO,
and engaged himself in other charity works to help the suffering Muslims all over the world.
He languished in the Indian jails for nearly six years in illegal incarceration where he was kept
despite the failure of Indian government to procure a conviction against him for trumped up
charges under TADA. He managed to return to Pakistan in 2000.
Referring to press reports of possible extradition of the detainee to the US, the petitioner had
maintained that the extradition of the detainee would be in violation of the provisions of the
Extradition Act, 1972. It would also be in violation of the constitutional guarantees.
It was the contention of the petitioner that if the allegation against the detainee was that he had
committed an offence within Pakistan, he had the right to defend himself against such false
accusations in the courts of Pakistan. No court outside Pakistan has the right to try the detainee.
Sadia Omar Saeed Shaikh had taken the position that she and her baby son would be deeply
aggrieved if the detainee was forced to leave Pakistan as he was the sole bread-winner of the
family.
It was, therefore, prayed that the court direct the respondents to refrain from surrendering the
detainee to any foreign authority and in particular to the authorities of US government in
contravention of the law of the land (particularly the Extradition Act, 1972) and the
constitutional guarantees (Particularly the guarantee enshrined in Article 15 thereof).
Under the 1972 Extradition Act, the country requesting extradition is required to place all the
relevant material before a judge to be appointed by the federal government.
March 7, 2002 Thursday Zilhaj 22, 1422
KARACHI: Prime witness identifies Omer Shaikh as Pearl’s kidnapper
By Tahir Siddiqui
KARACHI, March 6: The taxi driver, who had dropped Daniel Pearl near a hotel, identified on
Wednesday Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh, the prime suspect in the US journalist kidnapping case,
as one of the kidnappers, before a judicial magistrate.
According to the cab driver, Nasir, as he dropped the Wall Street Journal reporter near the
Metropole Hotel a white car appeared there. One of the four occupants of the car got down and
made Daniel Pearl sit in the car by holding his arm.
Court sources said the driver, who appeared as the prime witness for the prosecution, identified
Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh from the set of dummies during the identification parade before the
judicial magistrate, South, Irum Jahangir.
No reporter or lawyer was allowed to attend the court proceedings by the police, who took
positions at different points on the premises of the City courts.
According to the investigators, Nasir appeared as prosecution witness voluntarily.
The sources said the statement of driver Nasir under section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code
could not be recorded before the magistrate as the prime suspect wanted his attorney to be
present for the cross-examination of the witness before he deposed against him.
They said the prime suspect submitted before the magistrate that his relatives were not being
allowed to meet him and that he wanted to engage a lawyer for his defence.
The magistrate, the sources said, ordered the police authorities to arrange a meeting between
Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh and his relatives so that he could be represented in the court.
The senior superintendent of police, investigation, Manzoor Mughul, appeared before the court
and assured it that the meeting of Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh with his relatives would be
arranged accordingly.
She fixed March 9 for recording the statement of the prosecution witness under 164 CrPC.
Meanwhile, sources close to the investigation said that the specimens of the handwriting of
suspects Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh and Adil Shaikh were also taken before the magistrate and
they were sent to the handwriting expert with the text of the email messages, written by the two
suspects, for verification.
They said Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh had prepared the email messages in English and Adil in
Urdu.
Earlier, the police authorities brought Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh, who was muffled with a piece
of cloth, to the City courts at around 1:40pm amid extra-ordinary security arrangements. He was
taken straight to the courtroom. Adil Shaikh was brought to the court at about 2:45pm.
Following the court proceedings, the police took the two suspects away at 3:10pm.
March 10, 2002 Sunday Zilhaj 25, 1422
KARACHI: Taxi driver records statement in court: Daniel Pearl case

By Tahir Siddiqui
KARACHI, March 9: The star witness for the prosecution in the Daniel Pearl kidnapping case,
who had earlier identified the prime suspect, Ahmed Umer Saeed Shaikh, as one of the
kidnappers, recorded on Saturday his statement before a judicial magistrate.
Nasir Abbas, the 32-year-old taxi-driver, stated before the JM, South, Ms Irum Jahangir, on oath
that on Jan 23 he was having his car washed near the Do Talwar in Clifton. He said, in the
meantime, a taxi-driver, Faisal Afridi, came there and told him that some people needed two cabs
for Sheraton Hotel.
The cab-driver said he followed Afridi to pick up the passengers from Zamzama in Clifton where
a journalist, his wife and another woman were standing.
“The journalist got into the front seat of my taxi and asked me to take him to Laxon Building. He
talked to me in English which I could not understand.”
He said the woman, accompanying the couple, told him in Urdu to take the passenger to Laxon
Building, situated behind the PIA booking office.
The driver said he took the journalist to his destination. He said the journalist got down from the
cab, asking him to wait. “After a short while, he returned and asked me to take him to the
Citizens-Police Liaison Committee (CPLC) office,” he said.
Nasir Abbas said he asked a man about the CPLC office as he did not know its address. “The
man told me that it was at the offices of the SSP South.”
He said he took the journalist to the SSP South office. “He got down from the taxi and went into
the office, but returned immediately with a man, who told me that he wanted to go to the CPLC
office at the Governor’s House.”
The cab-driver said he took the US journalist to the Governor’s House. “He asked me to wait and
went inside.”
He said Daniel Pearl returned after 45 minutes and asked him to go to Village Restaurant. “Since
he spoke in English, I could not understand him, and then he told me to take him near Metropole
Hotel.”
The driver said the US journalist asked him to stop when he reached Metropole Hotel. “He was
talking on his mobile phone at that time. Then he got down from th taxi and asked me about the
fare. I could not understand. I asked him to give me as much as he was wanted to. He took out a
Rs500-note. I was retuning him Rs200 when he nodded me to keep the change. In the
meanwhile, a white car, in which four people were travelling, stopped ahead of my cab. The
journalist walked to that car and the man sitting with the driver in the front seat of the white car
got down. The journalist shook hand with that man, who opened the rear door of his car and
made him sit in the car,” the driver said.
Pointing to Ahmed Umer Saeed Shaikh, the driver said: “The man who made the journalist sit in
the car is present in the courtroom and I recognise him.”
Additional advocate-general Salman Habibullah appeared on behalf of the state for the statement
of the prosecution witness under section 164 of CrPC.
Saiful Malook, a Lahore-based attorney hired as defence counsel by the Shaikh’s family,
appeared in the court. He, however, did not cross-examine the witness, though the court gave
him an opportunity to do so.
The judicial magistrate in her observations on the statement of the prosecution witness said “the
defence counsel was given an opportunity to meet the accused, and he met him and discussed
with him for half an hour in my chamber.”
However, later talking to newsmen on the premises of the City Courts, the defence counsel said
he had met his client for only five minutes in the presence of the JM. He said he refused to cross-
examine the prosecution witness since he was not given “a proper opportunity to seek
instructions from his client for the purpose.”
He quoted his client as telling him and the magistrate that the investigation officer told him in the
morning that there was no evidence against him, and that police were fabricating evidence
against him due to certain compulsion. Shaikh Umer also requested the court to call the
investigation officer and ask him on oath if he (the suspect) was telling lies.
Police had sealed off all entrances leading to the court of the judicial magistrate and they did not
allow anybody to attend the court proceedings.
Even Khawaja Naveed Ahmed, the counsel for other suspects, was not allowed to attend the
proceedings.
Talking to Dawn, the defence counsel said the statement of an accused under section 164 of
CrPC was to be recorded in the presence of all the accused in the case. “In this case a piecemeal
process has been adopted, which is not only unprecedented, but also of no legal effect under the
law of the land,” he said.
Mr Khawaja said the opportunity to cross-examine a prosecution witness was to be provided to

all the other accused or their counsel in the case “as the interest of all the accused is common.”
He said any statement made or any question asked of the witness could adversely affect the case
of other accused. “In the present case neither the accused were produced in court, nor their
counsel given an opportunity to cross-examine the prosecution witness.”
Police brought the prime suspect, clad in a light sky-blue shalwar-qamees with his face muffled,
to the court amid strict security under the supervision of the senior superintendent of police,
investigation, Manzoor Ahmed Mughul, aroun d 1:50pm.
March 12, 2002 Tuesday Zilhaj 27, 1422
KARACHI: Court allows counsel to meet accused: Daniel Pearl case
KARACHI, March 11: Justice Shabbir Ahmed of the High Court of Sindh, who is also the
administrative judge of anti-terrorism courts for Karachi division, allowed on Monday counsel to
meet two accused in the Daniel Pearl kidnapping and murder case.
Khawaja Naveed Ahmed, advocate, moved an application seeking permission of the court to
meet undertrial prisoners Fahd Nasim and Syed Salman Saqib to seek instructions and to prepare
their defence.
After hearing the counsel, the judge passed the order: “The counsel is allowed to meet his above
clients in jail in accordance with the jail rules.”
Both accused in their confessional statements reportedly confessed their involvement in sending
e-mails to media organizations containing the pictures of Daniel Pearl, reporter of the Wall Street
Journal, in captivity.
They also confessed that they sent two e-mails on the directives of the main accused in the case,
Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh.—APP/PPI
KARACHI: Omar’s remand extended in Daniel case
By Our Reporter
KARACHI, March 12: Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, prime suspect in the Daniel Pearl case, told
the court on Tuesday that if he is killed in a fake encounter at the behest of the US, America
would suffer.
He claimed that if he is extradited to that US, it would return him the same way as India had
done.
He made this statment when the prosecution obtained extension in his police remand “as a last
chance” for another 10 days until March 22 from Justice Shabbir Ahmed of the Sindh High
Court, who is also administrative judge of the Anti-Terrorism Courts in Karachi.
Amid tight security, Ahmed Omar Shaikh and Shaikh Adil were brought to the court handcuffed,
with their faces muffled, in an armoured personnel carrier at 1pm.
Two other accused Fahad Nasim and Salman Saqib were earlier remanded to judicial custody by
a judicial magistrate after recording their confessional statements.
The police have made out a case under sections 365/A/302/109/34 PPC FIR 24/2002 read with 7
(a) 8 (a) (b) (c) 11/A (a) (b) (c) 6 (2) (a) (b) (c) (e) (f), 11/H (324) 11/V (1) (a) (b) (2) 11/L (a) (b)
6/7 A (b) (c) (e) 11/ H-2/ (a) 2(b) 11/w (1) (2) 17 ATA.
The names of absconding accused are Amjad Hussain Farooqi alias Hyder Farooqi alias Hasan
Mansoor, Asim alias Qasim, Hashim alias Arif, Hasan, Imtiaz Siddiqui, Ahmed Bhai and an
unknown person who took photographs of Daniel Pearl in captivity and sent them through e-mail
to the international media.
The two accused were taken to the chambers of the administrative judge where advocate-general
Sindh, Raja Qureshi, representing the state, sought further remand of the accused on the premise
that further investigation is required to be done. SSP Investigations-II Manzoor Mughal and
investigating officer were also present.
Khwaja Naveed Ahmed, counsel of Shaikh Adil, told reporters later that he opposed the
extension plea on the ground that in the circumstances of the present case, Section 19(5) of the
ATA ordinance was not applicable for extension in remand.
His contention was that the prosecution had not produced any charge-sheet. He said that Omar
filed an application before the administrative judge seeking permission to meet anyone of his
family member, on which the court issued notice to AG Sindh for March 16.
The administrative judge of the ATC also asked the AG Sindh to provide further evidence for
justifying the extension in police remand. Justice Shabbir Ahmed adjourned the matter for 10
minutes.
Raja Qureshi told reporters that he contended before Justice Shabbir Ahmed that experts’
evidence from the FBI is to be secured and weapons of offence are also to be secured.
He further informed the administrative judge that till the date confessional statements of the
accused had been recorded, identification parade had been held and the petition of the accused
(Omar) had been disposed of by a division bench of the High Court on the stand taken on behalf
of the state that if and when a decision is taken to extradite him (Omar), it would be done without
contravention of the law of the land.
He further submitted that hand-writing expert’s opinion had already been obtained, whereas
video cassette was under examination by the experts and arrests of the
absconding accused were yet to be made.
Raja Qureshi stated that accused persons have been operating in different names
and identities, which are required to be ascertained in the process of
investigation. The AG Sindh submitted that absconding accused possessed
National Identification Cards (NICs’) under four names and, therefore, their
arrest was a difficult task.
While recording the order of remand, Justice Ahmed extended the remand up to
March 22 as a last chance. The Administrative Judge further recorded the
statment of the AG on apprehension expressed by the accused that he shall only
be extradited if and when decided to be handed over to some officer or authorities of a foreign
country, and they he shall be delivered without contravention to law of the land.
Justice Ahmed also recorded the statment of the accused in the order of remand to the effect that
“if he is extradited, America will return him the same way as India had returned him and
‘America will suffer if I am killed in false encounter at their behest’. As a last chance, police
remand is extended up to March 22, 2002”.
Wall Street Journal correspondent Daniel Pearl went missing on Jan 23 in Karachi and on Feb
22, it was announced that he was dead, after a videotape containing scenes of his killing were
received by the authorities.
On Feb 25, when the prime suspect and others were produced before the administrative judge, he
had extended their police remand till March 12.
Prime suspect Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh and two others had told the administrative judge of
the Anti-Terrorism Court that the police had forcibly obtained their signatures on blank papers.
Salman Saqib, Fahad and Adil Shaikh, who have been linked with the high profile kidnapping
case of Wall Street Journal journalist Daniel Pearl, were arrested in Gulistan-i-Johar for their
alleged involvement in sending some E-mail messages containing abducted journalist’s pictures
in captivity, allegedly on the instruction of prime suspect Shaikh Omar Saeed.
March 16, 2002 Saturday Muharram 1, 1423
KARACHI: Five women, three men arrested for kidnapping: 11 babies

recovered
KARACHI, March 15: Police recovered 11 kidnapped children, four boys and seven girls, whose
ages ranged from two months to three years, from a bungalow in Gulshan-i-Iqbal on Friday and
arrested five women and three men.
A senior police officer said police raided a spotted bungalow, No A-29, in Block 13-D in
Gulshan-i-Iqbal after they received information about the presence of kidnapped children. Police
found 11 children, and five women and three men there. The latter had been taken into custody.
The children were about to be smuggled out of the country.
The children were sent to the Edhi Child Home in Mithadar.
Those arrested have been identified as Dennis Chance, Derrick Chance, their mother, Joyce
Chance; Joseph Aziz, and four nannies, Shazia, Nasreen, Parveen and Zeenat.
The sources said carriers of six children had been arrested in 1998 by the FIA immigration at the
Quaid-i-Azam International Airport. Dennis Chance had appeared in court and claimed to be
father of those six children. The court asked him to prove his contention, but he had not turned
up at the court since.
The city police chief, Asad Jehangir, said: “We have come to know that suspects/accused had
been arrested in 1998, and we are investigating into it.”
Faisal Edhi of the Edhi Foundation said the 11 children had been lodged at the Edhi Child Home
in Mithadar and parents of none of these had contacted them so far.
He said six babies had been recovered in 1998, and they were sent to the Edhi Child Home. Five
of the children were still in the Child Home and one of them had been adopted by a childless
couple. He said none of the parents of the six children had, so far, contacted the Edhi
Foundation.
He said in the majority of such cases children were bought from poverty- stricken parents, and if
their children were recovered, they did not want to claim them for fear of arrest or interrogation.
“We are not hopeful that the parents of these 11 children will contact us after the news appears in
the press. However, I appeal to the parents of a two-month-old girl to contact us as she is not
having milk as she might be on breast-feeding. She is crying and keeps fainting. She is not
drinking even water, or anything else. If she will not have milk, she may die”, a worried Faisal
Edhi said.
During initial investigation, the suspects told police that poverty-stricken people or those who
had illegitimate child dropped their child outside churches. They gave them to childless couples
abroad, the suspects added.
Another senior police officer said these children might have been kidnapped in hospitals in the
city and were about to be smuggled to Malta.
Derrick Chance’s wife was in Malta and she had sent adoption papers, carrying stamps of
attestation from Malta’s foreign office.
Police also recovered 13 passports from the possession of the suspects, which were issued from
Hyderabad. Fake birth certificates had also been recovered, police said.
Police said the children were to be smuggled to Malta, where one child was to be sold for
20,000-30,000 US dollars (Rs1.2-Rs1.8 million).
DIG Investigation Fayyaz Leghari said: “We do not have any case about disappearance or
kidnapping of children at any of the police stations in the city.”
Asked about the possibility of parents approaching police but the latter refusing to register cases,
the city police chief ruled out this possibility and said: “We always take up this matter seriously,
and no case about kidnapping or disappearance of children has been registered.”
KARACHI: Decision on Omar’s extradition after Musharraf’s return
By Shamim-ur-Rahman
KARACHI, March 15: The question of extraditing the main accused in the Daniel Pearl case,
Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh, to the United States, and implications of his indictment by the US
authorities will be examined at the highest level on return of President Musharraf from his
foreign tour, highly- placed sources said here on Friday.
Six days before the Pakistani prosecution could have framed charges against Omar and others to
begin the trial, the US Attorney-General, John Ashcroft, announced on Thursday that a grand
jury had indicted Omar for the kidnapping and murder of Pearl and abduction of an American in
India in 1994.
A meeting of senior officials of the Sindh government had already taken place with the federal
authorities in Islamabad after the Sindh High Court granted extension in remand “as a last
chance,” the sources said.
Authorities were mindful of Omar’s statement before the administrative judge of the ATC on
Tuesday wherein he had maintained that if he was killed in a false encounter at the behest of the
USA, the latter would suffer. In this context, they also examined the security of the interned
accused and their safety was being augmented.
Asked to state the official position, the Advocate-General Sindh, Raja Qureshi, said the law
would take its own course and emphasized that he had no knowledge or instructions, so far,
about the decision or otherwise of Omar’s extradition. He said no law of the land would be
violated if a decision was made to fall back on the Extradition Act of 1972.
As regards the existence of extradition treaty, Justice Shafiur Rahman in Mohammed Azam
Malik Vs Government of Pakistan case had observed that “we find on the record the extradition
treaty itself which is dated 26nd of December 1931 and it had been ratified by the government of
the United States and Great Britain and in the United States Code Annotated, Title 18,
Cumulative Annual Pocket Part for use in 1983 are listed bilateral treaties of extradition between
the United States and the other governments...” He had also cited the entries in respect of
Pakistan.
Talking to the media, the AG had appeared to be confident that the prosecution’s case had been
established to make a complete charge and to establish the guilt to arrive at conclusive
convictions.
He said experts evidence from the FBI was to be secured, weapons of offence was also to be
secured. He said confessional statements of the accused had been recorded, identification parade
been held, the petition of the accused (Omar) been disposed of by a division bench of the SHC
on the stand taken on behalf of the state that if and when it was decided to extradite him (Omar),
that would be done without the violation of the law of the land.
He had further submitted that handwriting expert’s opinion had already been obtained, and the
video cassette was under examination by experts and arrest of the absconding accused were yet
to be made.
Legal experts however point out the fact that none of the accused had, so far, agreed to become
an approver and the investigators had not yet recovered anything from them which was
possessed by Pearl, to link them with his kidnapping or murder. Dead body or its remains have
not yet been found.
The present case had not yet reached the trial stage. It was still in the investigation stage. It
would attain the trial stage once charge had been framed and the judge had taken cognizance of
the charges, the experts said.
The legal position was that in case trial of the accused had begun, then the proceedings had to be
completed. If conviction had been awarded, it had to be served before he was handed over to
another country, they said.
The legal community was concerned whether history would repeat itself like the case of Aimal
Kasee and Yousuf Ramzi, or the Pakistan authorities would follow the procedure as was done by
the USA while extraditing Admiral Mansoorul Haq (retd).
The counsel for the three co-accused, Khwaja Naveed Ahmed, has taken the position that the US
has no territorial jurisdiction to try Omar for the kidnapping and murder of Pearl.
Referring to the indictment by the US authorities, the counsel asked whether or not its purpose
was to frustrate the intent and purpose of the clauses of the treaty between Pakistan and the
USA?
He said the question lurked in the mind why indictment had
been chosen at this stage while it was fully well known that
Omar had been involved in the hijacking of an Indian plane.
Question was asked whether the criminal court proceedings

could be allowed to compromise sovereignty of the country and whether extraditing one
individual could make the remaining accused to wait for being confronted with the rigours of
trial.
“You cannot proceed in criminal trial in a piecemeal manner. You cannot exclude the principal
accused and proceed with the trial of co-accused alone against whom the maximum charge could
be of abetment or sharing common intention with the principal accused. In case you exclude the
principal accused, charge on other accused will be difficult to frame,” said Mr Khwaja.
It was also asked whether the same yardstick could be applied for the appreciation of evidence to
cases of terrorism and ordinary cases of criminal jurisprudence.
The question was also raised whether the material available with the prosecution in Pakistan was
of a nature which could be admissible in proceedings before a court in the USA.
Whether the material available with the FBI would be given preference to the material collected
by the investigating agencies in Pakistan?
It was also pointed out whether surrendering a person to be tried by a jury system in a foreign
country would be appropriate or otherwise, despite the fact that the jury system in Pakistan had
been abolished more than a decade ago.
Saiful Malook, the Lahore-based counsel for Omar, termed the indictment of his client by the US
authorities absurd. He was of the view that the indictment of Omar for abducting a US citizen in
India was a violation of international law and amounted to double jeopardy. During his captivity
in India nothing had been proved against him in the shape of legal evidence, Malook said, adding
Omar could not be tried twice for the same offence.
KARACHI: Omar, co-accused remanded in judicial custody
By Shamim-ur-Rahman
KARACHI, March 22: Amid tight security the principal accused, Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh,
and co-accused Adil Shaikh in the Daniel Pearl case were remanded in judicial custody by the
judge of an anti-terrorism court on Friday, as the prosecution submitted the interim challan
against the principal accused and 10 others in a proceeding from which the media and everyone
else was barred.
The Advocate-General Sindh, Raja Qureshi, submitted the interim challan before Judge Arshad
Noor Khan of the ATC who, while admitting the challan, asked the prosecution to submit the
final challan on March 29 and produce all the four accused in custody on that date.
They have been charged with kidnapping for ransom, murder, and terrorism coupled with
conspiracy for which, if convicted, they could be awarded death penalty.
The accused were booked under section 365-A (kidnapping for ransom), 368 (Wrongfully
concealing or keeping in confinement, kidnapping), 302 (murder/Qatl-i-amd), 205 (False
personation), 120 A (Criminal conspiracy) and Section 34 of PPC.
The other sections against the accused include section 7 (A), B (a) (b), (c), 6 (2), (b), (c),(e), (f),
11 V (1) (a), (b) (2), 11 L (a), (b), 7 (a), (b), (e), 11 H (2), (a), 11 W (1), (2), and 7 ATA.
The accused are Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh alias Muzaffar Farooq, Shaikh Mohammed Adil,
Salman Saqib, Fahad Nasim, and seven absconders, Amjad Husain Farooqi alias Haider Farooqi
alias Hasan, Asif alias Qasim, Hashim, Qari Abdul Qadeer, Hasan alias Ahmed Bhai, Imtiaz
Siddiqui and a person who bought a Polaroid camera. The Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel
Pearl went missing on Jan 23 in Karachi and on Feb 22 he was declared dead after the authorities
received and examined a videotape containing visuals of him being killed.
The counsel of the two accused present in the court, Omar and Adil, who were not present, were
provided the copy of the interim challan, and the AG Sindh undertook to provide copies to the
other two co-accused who are in jail custody.
The ATC Judge, Arshad Noor, in his order, said: “Accused Fahad Naseem and Salman Saquib
have not been produced by jail authorities. Issue production order for them. Interim challan by
prosecution is accepted with the further direction to submit final challan in seven days till March
29 instant. The copies of prosecution’s case have been supplied to the accused present in court
under section 265 (c) of CrPC and receipt obtained.
“Raja Qureshi, the Advocate-General, Sindh, has undertaken that copies should be supplied to
accused in judicial custody in jail today. Accused are remanded to judicial custody till 29-3-
2002.”
The prosecution has relied on circumstantial evidence and showed recovery of two e-mails, one
in Urdu, one scanner, one laptop computer and its hard disc photograph of Pearl, a video
cassette, receipt of purchase of the scanner, receipt of the purchase of the Polaroid camera and
two National Identity Cards.
The prosecution has also stated that though dead body of Pearl and the weapon of his murder
have not yet been recovered, but there are possibilities of the recovery of the dead body of the
American journalist.
The prosecution has also stated that genuineness of the video tape showing Pearl’s murder was
confirmed by PTV engineers who examined the tape with the permission of the General
Manager, Karachi TV.
The prosecution has also attached confessional statements of the two co- accused, Fahad Nasim
and Salman Saquib, who are in judicial custody, along with the statements of two witnesses.
The AG, who was accompanied by SSP Investigation Manzoor Mughal, later told newsmen that
a list of 31 prosecution witnesses, including FBI officials, had been submitted along with the
interim challan. Names of FBI personnel were not mentioned in the interim challan.
The list of prosecution witnesses include the name of Mariane Pearl, who lodged the FIR of her
husband’s abduction, police inspector Javed Abbas, head constable Ashiq Ali, Nasir Abbas,
Faisal Khan Afridi, CPLC chief Jameel Yousuf, Asif Mehfooz Farooqi (journalist), Mehmood
Iqbal, Naeem Ahmed, Zaheer Ahmed, Chaudhary Nazar Husain, ASI Noor Mohammed, head
constable Mohammed Iqbal, Mohammed Arif Zakaria, Rajesh Kumar, Abdul Majeed, DSP
Investigation-II Ather Rasheed Butt, DSP Asghar Osman, inspector Rao Aslam, Faisal Noor,
Colonel Osman (retd), an official of Mobilink.
Mr Qureshi said once the court had examined and admitted the final challan and framed charges,
trial of the accused would begin. “The formal trial will begin on March 29,” he added.
Under the law, trial has to be completed in seven days. It is not yet clear whether the
complainant, Mrs Pearl, who is pregnant, would be in a position to undertake the journey soon to
enable the prosecution here to complete the trial within the mandated time frame.
Asked about Omar’s Feb 14 statement before Judge Arshad Noor that he had masterminded
Pearl’s abduction and declared that he believed Pearl was dead, Mr Qureshi said it was
extrajudicial statement, though it could be used against him.
According to sources, when Omar drew the attention of the court to his handwritten application
with a request for allowing him to meet his relations, the prosecution contended that now that he
had been remanded in jail custody, he should route his request through the jail authorities, as per
rules.
Several hundred policemen posted at the roadsides and on roof tops in and around the court
premises and about two dozen police mobiles were used to escort the APC in which the two
accused were brought to the court.
Omar and Adil were supposed to be produced before Justice Shabbir Ahmed, the Administrative
Judge of the anti-terrorism courts, who had granted extension in police custody until March 22
“as a last chance.” But as he was indisposed and at present sitting on the Hyderabad circuit
bench, he could not come. Therefore, the Chief Justice of the Sindh High Court asked the AG to
submit the interim challan before Judge Arshad Noor.
Adil’s brother Shaikh Aslam and his mother, who wanted to see him, were also not allowed
inside the court premises despite attempts by a local lawyer to seek the court’s permission.
Aslam said I and mother wanted to know about Adil’s welfare. He said he approached many
officials, but to no avail.
The counsel for some of the co-accused, Khawaja Naveed Ahmed said he later filed an
application before the ATC judge claiming that Salman Saqib had told him that he was suffering
from hepatitis and passing blood in stool.
The judge ordered the jail authorities to submit report on the next date.
Khawaja Naveed claimed that dead body of Pearl had not be recovered, cause of death was not
known, place of murder had not be established, weapon of offence had not been recovered, nor
had his place of confinement been identified.
The statement of the taxi-driver and identification of the principal accused by him and the
handwriting expert’s report could safely be labelled created pieces of evidence and no conviction
could be based on such evidence.
March 25, 2002 Monday Muharram 10, 1423
KARACHI: A team of counsel to defend Omar
By Our Reporter
KARACHI, March 24: Lahore-based lawyer Saiful Malook said here on Saturday that the
principal accused in the Daniel Pearl case, Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh, would be defended by a
team of counsel once the prosecution filed the final challan and charges were framed against all
the accused.
Counsel Malook was sceptical about the presence of any one of his team members here on
March 29 when the prosecution is required to submit the final challan in the case. The
prosecution, nevertheless, would do so before that date.
He told Dawn that when the final challan was submitted the court would be bound to provide its
copy and the accused would have seven days to raise their defence.
Omar, he said, would be defended by a team of lawyers who were working on the case, though
so far they were not in possession of a copy of even the interim challan.
The judge of an anti-terrorism court on Friday sent Omar, along with a co- accused, Adil Shaikh,
to prison after the prosecution submitted interim challan against them and nine others, charging
them with kidnapping for ransom, murder and terrorism coupled with conspiracy.
April 5, 2002 Friday Muharram 21, 1423
KARACHI: Plea against jail trial of Omar dismissed
By Our Reporter
KARACHI, April 4: As the trial of the accused in Daniel Pearl’s murder case opens inside
Central Prison here on Friday, a division bench of the Sindh High Court, on Thursday, dismissed
Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh’s petition challenging the Sindh government notification in this
regard.
The division bench comprised Chief Justice of the Sindh High Court, Justice Saiyed Saeed
Ashhad and Justice Ghulam Rabbani.
The bench, however, put the Advocate General Sindh on notice for April 10, in another
application in which the principal accused had contended that the presiding judge of the Anti-
Terrorism Court III, Arshad Noor Khan, cannot conduct the trial as he had himself become
witness to certain statements attributed to Omar Shaikh when he was produced before Mr Khan
for remand purposes.
At the outset of the proceedings, the SHC CJ, Saiyed Saeed Ashhad, asked Omar’s counsel,
Abdul Waheed Katpar, as to why he had not complied with office objections and that he should
have first gone there.
The counsel read out the provincial government’s notification for holding trial in the jail
premises, and contended that it did not mention any ground for such trial.
He cited Section 15 of the ATA Act pertaining to place of sitting. His contention was that it
means the trial should be held at an open place. He also cited sections 22 and 17 of the said act.
Referring to the relevant section of the ATA Act, Mr Katpar said that its spirit is that the trial be
held openly and publicly.
The bench asked the counsel to point out any illegality in the impugned notification issued by the
Sindh Home Secretary.
Omar’s counsel said that no ground is given in the notification justifying holding of trial inside
Central Prison, Karachi.
He also referred to the trials of two former premiers — late Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and Mian
Muhammed Nawaz Sharif — and said that the accused and petitioner will be prejudiced in case
of a jail trial. Disagreeing with the contentions of Mr Katpar, the AG Sindh, Raja Qureshi,
referred to Section 15(2) of the ATA Act that deals with sitting of the court. But his main
reliance was on Section 21(1) (A) of the ATA Act which says that “proceedings may be held in
camera, or under restricted entry of members of the public, necessary for the protection of judge,
witnesses or a victim’s family members, or to prevent persons from crowding or storming the
court to intimidate the judge.”
His contention was that the sitting of ATA judge in jail was duly notified. He said that trial in a
jail or a private house will be deemed to be an open trial in law. Restrictions are aimed at
providing security and for regulating entry. But that wouldn’t mean that the trial does not cease
to be open. His contention was that while regulating entry, one has to take note of the capacity of
the courtroom.
The AG submitted that the jail is not a prohibited place for criminal trial, nor can it be called an
illegal trial. A jail trial, he said, was being held for reasons of security to the parties, witnesses,
prosecution and defence.
He emphasized that there should not be any veil of secrecy nor there should be any impression
that it is a secret trial. “Dynamics of the judicial process should be thrown open to the public,
that should have reasonable access to the court, so long as the presiding judge is in full control
and the accused have all the facilities to defend themselves.”
In the context of a jail trial, he cited the cases of Murtaza Bhutto, Asif Zardari, Indira Gandhi,
etc.
Omar’s counsel submitted that when his client’s father went to jail, he was denied access despite
court orders.
The bench, nevertheless, dismissed the petition for reasons to be recorded later. Observers
termed it as a jolt to the defence counsel ahead of the trial.
But when Mr Katpar tried to take up another connected matter, in which he had maintained that
Judge Arshad Noor Khan of the ATC was not competent to preside, the Chief Justice observed it
as time-wasting tactics. He fixed the matter for April 10.
Another defence counsel, Mohsin Imam, later said that the defence wants an open and fair trial,
and said that his side would not boycott the proceedings. He said that the accused were innocent
and unless proved guilty, would remain innocent.
Counsel for the principal accused in the Daniel Pearl murder case, Ahmad Saeed Omar Shaikh,
had, on Tuesday, moved another application in the SHC, contending that Judge Arshad Noor
Khan of the ATC-III is not competent to try this case.
In this context, the counsel had maintained that it has been stated in the margin against the
above-mentioned four PWs, under a bracket, that when accused Omar Shaikh was taken to the
court of Judge Arshad Noor Khan to obtain his remand, the principal accused had stated: “I have
abducted Daniel Pearl”; “Daniel Pearl is dead”; “I do not wish to defend myself” and “I know I
will be extradited to the USA.”
Thus, the prosecution had itself made Arshad Noor Khan a witness in the case. It is immaterial
whether they examine him as a witness or not. The fact remains that Judge Khan has been made
a witness in the case, the applicant claimed.
As such, without any fault on his part, Judge Arshad Noor Khan happens to be disqualified from
trying this case, against accused Omar Shaikh, the applicant’s counsel contended.
Under the ATA law, a trial has to be completed in seven days, but in view of the pregnancy of
Daniel Pearl’s wife, it does not seem possible.
The accused are Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh alias Muzzafar Farooq, Shaikh Muhammad Adil,
Salman Saqib, Fahad Nasim and the seven absconders, namely Amjad Hussain Farooqi alias
Haider Farooqi alias Hasan, Asif alias Qasim, Hashim, Qari Abdul Qadeer, Hasan alias Ahmed
Bhai, Imtiaz Siddiqui, and a person who purchased a Polaroid camera. The accused, if convicted,
could be awarded death penalty.
Thirty-six prosecution witnesses have been cited in the final Challan. The thirty-six prosecution
witnesses include the wife of murdered American journalist of the Wall Street Journal, Marianne
Pearl, who had lodged the FIR of her husband’s abduction; Randel D. Bennet, regional security
officer, US Consulate, Karachi; John Loligan, FBI agent and Ronald Joseph, the computer expert
who authenticated the e-mails sent by the abductors of the late Mr Pearl.
The accused have been charged under Section 365-A (kidnapping for ransom), 368 (wrongfully
concealing or keeping in confinement, kidnapping), 302 (murder/Qatl-i-amd), 205 (false
personation), 120 A (criminal conspiracy) and Section 34 of the PPC.
The other sections against the accused include sections 7A, B (a) (b), (c); 6 (2), (b), (c), (e), (f);
11 V (1), (a), (b) (2); 11 L (a), (b); 7 (a), (b), (e); 11 H (2), (a); 11 W (1), (2) and 7 ATA. If
convicted, they could be awarded death penalty.
In the present case, the dead body of Daniel Pearl has not been recovered, cause of death is
unknown, place of murder has not be established, weapon of offence has not be recovered, nor
has the place of confinement been identified.
The Wall Street Journal correspondent, Daniel Pearl, went missing on Jan 23, 2002, in Karachi
and on Feb 22, he was declared dead after authorities received and examined a videotape
containing visuals of him being killed.
April 6, 2002 Saturday Muharram 22, 1423
KARACHI: Judge issues warrants for arrest of absconders: Omar Shaikh’s trial
begins
KARACHI, April 5: The formal proceedings of the Daniel Pearl kidnapping case commenced on
Friday inside the Central Prison, Karachi. No reporter or observer was allowed to attend the
proceedings by the authorities.
Ahmed Saeed Omar Shaikh, the alleged mastermind of Pearl’s Jan 23 kidnapping, and three co-
defendants — Salman Saqib, Fahad Naseem and Adil Shaikh — were produced before Judge
Arshad Noor Khan of ATC-3 who issued non-bailable warrants for the arrest of seven
absconding accused.
The judge put off the hearing of the case till 12th when the accused persons, who face charges of
murder, kidnapping and terrorism, are expected to be formally indicted in the case by the court.
The absconding accused are: Amjad Hussain Farooqui alias Haider Farooqui alias Hasan, Asif
alias Qasim, Hashim, Qari Abdul Qadeer, Hasan alias Ahmed Bhai, Imtiaz Siddiqui and a person
who purchased the Polaroid camera.
The authorities even did not allow six local journalists, who had obtained a court order on their
application for attending the court proceedings.
According to the order No. ATC-111/K/1047/2002, issued on Thursday by Judge Arshad Noor
Khan, the court allowed the six reporters of the local newspapers to cover the proceedings for 5-
4-2002 and directed the jail superintendent “to allow them to attend the court on the aforesaid
date at about 10am”.
Later, Khawaja Naveed Ahmed, counsel for Adil Shaikh and Fahad Naseem, briefed the curious
journalists upon the court proceedings.
He said accused Salman Saqib addressed the court like a Khatib (orator) and complained about
torture in custody.
“According to Saqib, the police slapped him on the face for 350 times and hit him with a whip
for 450 times during custody”, the counsel said.
The counsel quoted Salman Saqib as telling the court that he had been in Jehad in Kashmir
where he was also wounded. He (Saqib) said his wounds were bleeding due to police torture, he
said.
The counsel said the accused also complained before the court that the police officials had taken
Rs67,000 from him at the time of his arrest. Senior superintendent of police, investigation,
Manzoor Ahmed Mughul, appeared before the court assuring the return of money.
Salman Saqib also said that Fahad Naseem was implicated in the case merely because he was his
cousin. “I have participated in Jehad in Kashmir and have given sacrifices for Pakistan, and this
is what I am getting for my sacrifices”, Khawaja Naveed quoted the accused as saying before the
court.
The counsel told the reporters that Saeed appeared quiet and calm. “He kept on talking to his
father in a very low tone during the proceedings”, he said.
Earlier, advocate general, Sindh, Raja Qureshi, placed a letter about the three-member team of
the prosecutors.
Abdul Waheed Katpar, the counsel for Saeed, moved three applications in the court seeking
copies of certain documents.
The court granted his application for the supply of the copies of the e-mail messages, allegedly
sent by the accused persons.
Counsel Katpar’s application, seeking copy of the report of the hand-writing expert, was,
however, turned down by the judge following the objections of the chief prosecutor.
A lawyer from Lahore, Rai Bashir, filed the power on behalf of accused Salman Saqib for his
defence. He also moved an application for the medical check-up of his client by a doctor of his
own choice. The judge granted the application, allowing Dr. Tabish of the Aga Khan Medical
University Hospital to check the accused on his cost.
The US journalist, whose body has not yet been found, was allegedly kidnapped in front of a
restaurant near Metropole Hotel on Jan 23. A video tape received by the US consulate in Karachi
on Feb 21 documented his murder.
Meanwhile, the six reporters, who were not allowed to attend the court proceedings despite court
orders, moved an application against the jail authorities for contempt of court order before the
ATC-3.
KARACHI: Indictment of accused in Pearl case on 22nd
KARACHI, April 12: The Anti-terrorism Court No. 3 put off on Friday the hearing of the Daniel
Pearl kidnapping case till 22nd, when Ahmed Saeed Omar Shaikh, the alleged mastermind of the
US journalist’s kidnapping, and three others codefendants would be indicted in the case.
No reporter or observer was allowed to attend the court proceedings, being conducted on the
premises of the Central Prison, Karachi. The defence attorneys later briefed the newsmen on the
proceedings.
Judge Arshad Noor Khan also declared seven absconding accused as proclaimed offenders after
the police process server told the court that Amjad Hussain Farooqui alias Haider Farooqui alias
Hasan, Asif alias Qasim, Hashim, Qari Abdul Qadeer, Hasan alias Ahmed Bhai, Imtiaz Siddiqui
and a person who purchased the Polaroid camera could not be tracked down as they had gone
underground.
“I am innocent and committed no kidnapping or murder”, Abdul Waheed Katpur, the attorney
for Shaikh Umar, quoted his client as telling the court.
Mr Katpur also moved an application of the contempt of court against President Pervaiz
Musharraf on behalf of his client for making a statement to the effect that he wanted to see the
main suspect put to death.
The judge issued notice to the prosecution for the arguments on the maintainability of the
contempt of court application against the President. The application will come up on the next
hearing.
Rai Bashir, a Lahore-based lawyer appearing for accused Salman Saqib, told Dawn that he had
moved an application for the certified copy of the video tape, documenting the murder of the US
journalist.
However, the court dismissed the application telling the defence counsel that the tape was not
available on the court record so far.
Mr Bashir also filed another application for the medical treatment of his client. The judge
allowed the application and ordered the administrator of the hospital of Saqib’s choice to arrange
the examination of the accused by Dr Tabish Chawala on the premises of the prison.
Khawaja Naveed, counsel for Adil Shaikh and Fahad Naseem, said that the court allowed the
mother and brother of accused Adil to visit him. He said he also requested the court to allow the
relatives of his clients to attend the court proceedings. The advocate general sought time in that
connection.
The US journalist, whose body has not yet been found, was allegedly kidnapped from in front of
a restaurant near Metropole Hotel on Jan 23. A video tape received by the US consulate in
Karachi on Feb 21 documented his murder.
In his application of contempt of court against General Musharraf, Saeed stated that being the
head of the state, he is the fountain of power as well as the fountain of justice.
“But to demand the sentence of death for Omar is to tell the courts to convict and sentence the
accused to capital punishment”.
He further stated: “The effect of the statement issued by the respondent may place the judges
upon the horns of a dilemma to hold themselves accountable to the “Mighty Musharraf” or to
Mighty Allah”.
The applicant prayed: “In the light of foregoing submissions, it is respectfully submitted that the
honourable court may be pleased to issue process against the respondent under section 3 and 4 of
the Contempt of Court Act, 1976, read with Article 2A and 204 of the Constitution of the Islamic
Republic of Pakistan and if it is proved that the respondent has committed a contempt then the
honourable court may be pleased to proceed against the respondent according to the law of the
land”.
Meanwhile, the father of Omar Saeed Shaikh, said he did not expect a fair trial. “We are not
going to have a fair trial”, he said.
While talking to Dawn, he said: “I handed over my son to the authorities believing that justice
would be done”. He said that the justice system in Pakistan and the trial of his son seemed a
mockery of the criminal justice system after the statement of the President.
Saeed’s father said: “My son is being sentenced to death, even before the trial, by the President,
who is otherwise supposed to provide justice to every citizen of the country.
April 17, 2002 Wednesday Safar 3, 142
KARACHI: Omar’s petition comes up before SHC
By Our Reporter
KARACHI, April 16: When the application of the principal accused in Daniel Pearl murder case,
Ahmad Saeed Omar Shaikh, contending that Judge Arshad Noor Khan of the Anti-terrorism
Court-III is not competent to try this case came up before a division bench of the Sindh High
Court on Tuesday, his counsel relied on article 4 (c) of the Qanoon-i-Shahadat.
The bench comprised the Cheif Justice of the Sindh High Court, Justice Saiyed Saeed Ashhad,
and Justice Ghulam Rabbani.
The Advocate-General Sindh, Raja Qureshi, argued that answer to clause 4 was available in
section 304 (a) of PPC which pertained to proof of Qatl-i-Amad (premeditated murder).
Counsel Abdul Waheed Katpar, representing the principal accused, has taken a position that in
the list of prosecution witnesses the note in the margin against prosecution witnesses 17 to 20
makes the notified judge a witness. He also cited the text of the challan in support of his
contention.
The matter was adjourned to April 18.

KARACHI: SHC upholds death penalty by ATC: Kidnapping, murder case
By Our Reporter
KARACHI, April 16: The anti-terrorism appellate bench of the Sindh High Court on Tuesday
upheld the conviction and sentence of Shaikh Mohammed Amjad who was awarded death
sentence by the Anti-Terrorism Court No-III, Karachi, for kidnapping for ransom Barrister
Shakir Latif and for murdering him.
The bench, comprising Justice Muhammad Roshan Essani and Justice Mujeebullah Siddiqui,
announced the 111-page judgement while dismissing appeal and accepting confirmation
reference.
Shaikh Amjad, a businessman, had kidnapped his next-door neighbour, Shakir Latif, a 23-year-
old lawyer, for ransom on July 29. He killed the victim, giving him poison in a drink, at a house
he had rented within the limits of Darakhshan police.
The police had recovered the body of the victim on a lead given by Shaikh Amjad. Shakir Latif
had returned to Pakistan after doing his Bar-at-law from Lincoln’s Inn.
Shaikh Amjad was awarded double death sentence on two counts, one for kidnapping the lawyer
for ransom and the other for murdering him. The court had also ordered him to pay Rs200,000 as
Diyat to the victim’s family.
The convict filed an appeal in the SHC on Oct 15 last year.
Authored by Justice Mujeebullah Siddiqui, the bench in its judgment found that there were much
more stronger circumstances leading to the involvement of appellant in the abduction and death
of Shakir Latif.
The bench held that the prosecution had established beyond any doubt that the deceased was last
seen in the company of appellant, he thereafter disappeared and was not traceable for several
days. The appellant made several telephone calls to Fazal-ur-Rehman, father of the deceased.
This fact is proved with the help of CPLC workers who kept the telephone of complainant under
observation. It was traced out that on Aug 4, 2001 the appellant was talking to father of the
deceased from a Telecard Telephone Booth in Saddar. The appellant was arrested from the
Telecard Telephone Booth while talking to the father of deceased and then he led to the recovery
of body from the car of deceased parked inside the Bungalow No. 51/1.
It was also established that Bungalow No. 51/1 was in the possession of the appellant which was
established with the evidence of prosecution witness-11 Mehboob Younus, Chowkidar of
Bungalow No. 50/2. The accused had admitted in his statement that he had conversation with
that witness at Bungalow No. 51/1, twice before the incident.
The prosecution had also established that the appellant led to the recovery of shoes and gloves of
the deceased and a law book which was with the deceased. It was proved by prosecution witness
No 12, Ejaz Ahmed, Advocate, partner of the deceased in the law firm. The prosecution also
established that the appellant led to the recovery of juice bottle and the Potassium Cyanide,
which was mixed with the juice and which was found to be the cause of death of the deceased.
The circumstantial evidence consisting of recovery of the body of the deceased and other
incriminating articles lead to the presumption of involvement of the appellant in the abduction
for ransom and murder of the deceased, the judgment said.
The corroboration was available in the extra-judicial confession proved through prosecution
witnesses Ahmed Chinoy, Ejaz Latif and the admission of the appellant contained in his hand-
written statement (Ex.73).
The bench was convinced beyond any doubt that the evidence led by the prosecution and the
admission made by the appellant collectively established the guilt of the appellant for abduction
of deceased Shakir Latif for ransom and causing his death by administering poison.
The bench held that the appellant was rightly convicted by the trial court on the charge of
abduction for ransom and murder.
The bench found that the appellant preplanned the abduction and murder of the deceased in
pursuance of his pre-meditated planning of administering poison to the deceased and thereafter
attempted to knock out ransom money from his father.
“It is a case of cold-blooded murder and the entire conduct of the appellant is highly callous. A
young blooming barrister was done to death in a gruesome manner, sending a wave of shock to
the entire community of advocates, creating sense of fear and insecurity in the public, and,
therefore, there are no mitigating circumstances for awarding lessor punishment. The conviction
and sentence awarded by the learned trial court is, therefore, upheld. The confirmation
reference is accepted and the appeal stands dismissed”, the court held.
The case involved arguments on the jurisdiction of the court and interpretation of the ATA laws
and Qanoon-i-Shahadat.
The counsel for the appellant Shaikh Mir Mohammed had mainly objected to the jurisdiction of
anti-terrorism court, established under Section 13 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997.
According to him, the condition precedent was that in addition to the commission of scheduled
offence, it should be coupled with the act of terrorism as defined in Section 6 of the A.T.A.
According to the counsel, it was provided in the III-Schedule to the A.T.A. in pursuance of
Section 2(t) thereof, that any act of terrorism within the meaning of A.T.A. or any offence
punishable under the ATA or any attempt to commit, or any aid or abatement of, any conspiracy
to commit, any of the aforesaid offences shall mean as scheduled offence.
He had further argued that under subsection (2) of Section 6 of the ATA, read with Sub-section
(1)(a) of the said section, an action shall fall within the meaning of “terrorism” if it involved the
doing of anything that caused death or involved doing of anything that was likely to cause death
or involved a danger to a person’s life or any act which involved kidnapping for ransom,
hostage-taking or hijacking, shall mean the act of terrorism, provided the conditions spelt in
Section 6(1)(b) of ATA, were also fulfilled.
Raja Qureshi, Advocate General Sindh, and Ilyas Khan, Special Public Prosecutor, submitted
that the appellant could have submitted an application before the ATC under Section 23 of the
ATA, for transfer of the case to the court having jurisdiction but it was not done, and, therefore,
the appellant cannot be allowed to take this plea at the appellate stage. But the bench was not
persuaded to agree with the submission because the question of jurisdiction was a question of
law and could always be raised by any party at any stage, including the appeal.
The Advocate General, had submitted that the offences under Section 302 PPC and 365-A PPC
were admittedly the scheduled offences and the prosecution had collected sufficient material to
show that the incident was so callous, brutal, shocking and gruesome that it sent a waive of
insecurity and fear in the society at large. He had further submitted on the wordings used in
Section 6(1)(b).
The court after examining the respective contentions held that the prosecution had collected
sufficient material to create a nexus between the scheduled offences allegedly committed by the
appellant and Sections 6, 7 and 8 of ATA, as held by the Supreme Court in Mehran Ali’s case.
The court found that the prosecution had brought sufficient material on record to establish that
the act committed by the appellant fell within the purview of Sections 6 and 7 of ATA. The
offences allegedly committed by the appellant were scheduled offences and therefore, both the
conditions precedent for conferring jurisdiction on the ATC were fulfilled.
M. Ilyas Khan, Special Public Prosecutor had contended that the last seen evidence stood
established by the admission of the appellant himself even in his statement under Section 342 Cr.
P.C. and his statement on oath under Section 340(2)Cr.P.C. and Pw.7, Haji Altaf Hussain Mangi,
who was totally independent and had no reason to falsely implicate the appellant. This witness
had stated that he had seen deceased in the company of appellant near Bungalow No. 51/1, at
about 5-00 or 5-15 p.m. on the day of incident i.e. 29-7-2001.
On the question whether the evidence was sufficient for conviction of accused / appellant for the
commission of abduction for ransom punishable under Section 365-A Cr. P.C. read with Section
7(2) of the ATA and the offence of committing murder punishable under Section 302 PPC, the
court ruled in affirmative.
Father of the deceased after the announcement of judgment demanded public hanging for the
convict.
April 18, 2002 Thursday Safar 4, 1423
KARACHI: Man claims missing child after four years
By S. Raza Hassan
KARACHI, April 17: After four years following the recovery of six infants at the Karachi airport
where they were being smuggled to Malta, a parent of a missing child has contacted the police
claiming that one of the infants recovered in 1998 belonged to him.
The investigation officer of the case told Dawn that the man, Hafiz Mohammad Shahid, a
resident of Gulshan-i-Iqbal, after visiting the Mithadar Edhi Child Home submitted an
application with the town police officer of Gulshan-i-Iqbal.
According to the application, twins (both sons) were born to Hafiz Mohammad Shahid’s wife at
the Jinnah Postgraduate Medical Centre in 1998. However, one of the twins was stolen from the
hospital for which he later lodged an FIR and also approached the ombudsman’s office.
After visiting the Mithdar Child Home, Hafiz Mohammad found a child resembling his son, the
officer added.
The six minors recovered in 1998 were identified as Maria, Denial, Shaun, Martha, Luke and
Amy — all four to eight months old.
DSP investigation, Gulshan Town, Qasim Ghori, said that following the claim, they would have
to carry out DNA tests to ascertain the actual position. However, the tests could not be conducted
unless funds are released for the purpose, sources said.
As the DNA tests are not carried out in the city, a doctor and a lab technician have to come here
to collect samples and return either to Lahore or Islamabad to carry out the test, a senior police
officer said.
“They don’t come here before having return tickets and without an assurance for proper
lodging,” the police officer said, adding that the test cost around Rs6,000, besides travelling and
lodging expenses.
The murder case of a Chinese woman was recently solved after carrying out DNA tests in
Lahore. The tests incurred an expenditure of Rs25,000, including travelling and other expenses.
Earlier, giving judgment on the minors’ smuggling case, the court of the 1st senior civil Judge,
Karachi South, had observed that accused Concetta Charles, wife of Dennis Charles, had
smuggled minors for different couples for adoption.
“Taking into consideration these cases, it is evident that Concetta is continuously taking away
children from Pakistan to Malta,” the court had observed.
The court believed that the children/minors in bulk were taken to Malta with some ulterior
motives and not with the true spirit of adoption and welfare of the minors as no certificate was on
record to show that the intending couples/applicants were issueless and that there was no chance
of their giving birth to a child in the future. Submission of a certificate is mandatory in such a
case.
The court observed that there was a strong presumption that the religion of the parents of the
infants was Islam and, therefore, no person other than a Muslim could retain the custody of the
minors.
The court said as the infants were unclaimed, therefore the state was assumed to undertake and
bring up the minors as a natural guardian.
Hence, Pakistan being a Muslim state and the infants being Pakistani un-claimed minors, they
shall be treated as Muslims and custody of the Muslim children cannot be given to non-Muslims
foreigners, the court had observed.
After fulfilling legal formalities, a lawyer had adopted one of the six infants. The minors were
given in the custody of Bilquis Edhi and the infants have been looked after at the Edhi Mithadar
centre since then.
April 20, 2002 Saturday Safar 6, 1423
KARACHI: Trial court for Pearl case changed
By Our Reporter
KARACHI, April 19: The government on Friday changed the trial court for proceeding against
the accused in Daniel Pearl murder case.
Judge Abdul Ghafoor Memon of the ATC-II will now hear the case in Karachi Central Prison,
instead of Judge Arshad Noor Khan of the ATC-III.
The decision was taken by the Chief Justice of the Sindh High Court, Saiyed Saeed Ashhad, after
the division bench he was presiding over allowed the application of the principal accused Ahmad
Saeed Omar Shaikh who had raised a point contending that Judge Arshad Noor Khan was not
competent to try the case, because according to the challan, he had himself become a witness.
The bench comprised chief justice of the Sindh High Court and Justice Ghulam Rabbani.
At the outset of the proceedings on Friday, the state agreed to transfer trial of the case from the
court of Judge Arshad Noor to any other judge of the Anti-terrorism Court, provided it did not
cause a delay in the trial which is to commence on April 22 in Karachi Central Prison.
The position was taken by Sindh advocate-general Raja Qureshi when application of Omar
Shaikh came up before the division bench.
Mr Qureshi said the decision was taken to enhance transparency and impartiality of the trial.
Counsel for Omar Shaikh, Mr Abdul Waheed Katpar, cited various cases in support of his
contention that Mr Arshad Noor Khan cannot try the case because in the list of prosecution
witnesses the note in the margin against PWs 17 to 20 made the judge a witness.
Mr Abdul Hafeez Lakho, a former advocate-general who was appointed amicus curiae, was also
supportive of the idea of transferring the case. He said in view of the citations, there would be no
harm if the case was transferred to another judge.
Mr Katpar had relied on Article 4 (c) of Qanoon-i-Shahadat.
The advocate-general contended that answer to clause 4 was available in 304 (a) PPC, which
pertained to proof of Qatl-i-Amd.
Counsel Abdul Waheed Katpar had contended that in the list of prosecution witnesses the note in
the margin against PWs 17 to 20 made the notified judge a witness.
He also cited text of the challan in support of his contention.
The counsel had maintained that it was stated in the margin against the four PWs under a bracket
that when accused Omar Shaikh was taken to the court of Judge Arshad Noor Khan for obtaining
his remand, the principal accused had stated: “I have abducted Daniel Pearl”; “Daniel Pearl is
dead”; “I do not wish to defend myself”, and “I know I will be extradited to the US”.
Thus the prosecution had itself made Mr Arshad Noor Khan a witness in the case. It was
immaterial whether they examine him as a witness or not.
The fact remained that Judge Khan had been made a witness in the case, the applicant had
claimed.
April 23, 2002 Tuesday Safar 9, 1423
KARACHI: Accused in Pearl case indicted

KARACHI, April 22: Ahmed Saeed Omar Shaikh, the alleged mastermind of a US journalist’s
kidnapping, and three other accused denied on Monday their involvement in the case when an
anti-terrorism court formally indicted them.
The four accused pleaded “not guilty” when Judge Abdul Ghafoor Memon of the ATC-2 read
out the charges of kidnapping, murder, abetment and criminal conspiracy under sections 356-A,
302, 109 and 120-B of PPC. They were also charged with creating harassment and terror in
society under sections 7, 8 and 11 of the Anti-terrorism Act.
Except for the three defence counsel and court staff, no one was allowed to attend the court
proceedings, being conducted inside Central Prison, Karachi. The media persons who thronged
the jail at 8:30am, waited outside for the defence lawyers till 3:30pm.
Khwaja Naveed Ahmed, attorney for Fahad Naseem and Asil Shaikh, later briefed newsmen on
the court proceedings.
At the outset, ASI Tariq, the process server, appeared in the court and informed that he could not
track down the seven absconding accused.
The court separated the case of the absconders — Amjad Hussain Farooqui alias Haider
Farooqui alias Hasan, Asif alias Qasim, Hashim, Qari Abdul Qadeer, Hasan alias Ahmed Bhai,
Imtiaz Siddiqui and a person who bought a Polaroid camera —, and the court ordered to keep the
case on a dormant file.
The defence counsel said the prime accused stated that he did not recognize this court when the
judge formally arraigned him in the case. “I want to be tried by a Shariat court,” he said.
The defence counsel said the judge recorded his remarks on the paper containing the charges.
Later, the prosecution produced its first and star witness, the taxi driver, Nasir Abbas, who last
drove and dropped Daniel Pearl, the US journalist. The taxi driver also identified the prime
suspect as one of the kidnappers.
The 32-year-old taxi driver deposed on oath that on Jan 23 a taxi drier, Faisal Afridi, told him at
Do Talwar in Clifton that some people at Zamzama Street in Clifton needed two cabs for
Sheraton Hotel.
The taxi driver said the passengers were a journalist, his wife and another woman who were
already standing there.
He said a white car, occupied by four people, stopped ahead of his cab as he reached near Village
Restaurant. He said Ahmed Saeed Omar Shaikh was the man who got down from the white car
and made the journalist sit in his car.
Abdul Waheed Katpar, attorney for Omar Shaikh, Rai Bashir, attorney for Salman Saqib, and
Khwaja Naveed, attorney for Fahad Naseem, also cross-examined the prosecution witness.
During the cross-examination by Khwaja Naveed, the taxi driver said he did not know how far
the residence of the late prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was from Do Talwar. He also said his
brother was in the police department.
Abdul Waheed Katpar withdrew his application of contempt of court against President Pervez
Musharraf.
restaurant near Metropole Hotel on Jan 23. A video-tape received by the US consulate in Karachi
on Feb 21 documented his murder.
The judge put off the hearing of the case to Tuesday when the prosecution would produce more
witnesses against the accused.
KARACHI: Four more PWs record statements in Pearl case
KARACHI, April 23: Four more prosecution witnesses recorded on Tuesday their statements in
the Daniel Pearl kidnapping-cum- murder case before the anti-terrorism court No. 2.
Judge Abdul Ghafoor Memon put off the hearing of the case till Wednesday after the deposition
of Jamil Yousuf, chief of the Citizen-Police Liaison Committee, Inspector Javed Abbas,
Inspector Faisal Noor and DSP Athar Rasheed Butt.
The three defence attorneys — Abdul Waheed Katpur for the prime accused, Ahmed Omar
Saeed Shaikh, Khawaja Naveed Ahmed for Fahad Naseem and Adil Shaikh, and Rai Bashir for
accused Salman Saqib — also cross-examined the four prosecution witnesses.
The trial is being conducted inside the Central Prison, with no reporter or observer attending the
court proceedings. Only the family members of the accused persons, including the father of
Shaikh Omar, were allowed to attend the court proceedings. Later they and the defence counsel
briefed the newsmen, who remained outside the jail for the whole day.
Khawaja Naveed told the reporters that the court proceedings commenced at 10am with the
production of the CPLC chief as the second prosecution witness in the case.
“He is an agent of the Jews”, shouted Salman Saqib as Jamil Yousuf appeared in the dock for his
deposition, Khawaja Naveed told the reporters.
According to Khawaja, the accused told the court that the CPLC chief himself had stripped and
tortured them. “He (Jamil Yousuf) also threatened that he would also pick up our mothers and
sisters and strip them, too, if we did not make confessional statements”, the counsel further
quoted Salman Saqib as alleging.
The CPLC deposed before the court that the US journalist had sought on January 22 an
appointment with him. He said he asked Daniel Pearl to come to his office next day at 5:45pm.
Jamil Yousuf said the journalist remained with him in his office at the Governor’s House till
6:50pm when he received a call on his cellular phone. He quoted Pearl as telling the caller that
he was very close to him and would reach shortly.
The CPLC chief also placed on record certain documents, including the notification of the
CPLC. The defence counsel, however, raised objection to the placing of the documents on the
court record. The judge overruled the objection and observed that he would decide this point at
the stage of the judgment in the case.
Prosecution witness Inspector Javed Abbas deposed that he had collected the email messages and
photographs from the wife of the missing journalist. Later, he said, he with Inspector Rao Aslam
proceeded to collect the record of Room No. 411 at the Akbar International Hotel in Rawalpindi,
where the accused had allegedly planned the kidnapping.
DSP Athar Rasheed Butt and Inspector Faisal Noor in their almost identical statements deposed
that Shaikh Omar had confessed to the crime in the presence of Judge Arshad Noor Khan of the
ATC-3 on February 14, when they had taken the accused to the court for obtaining his custody
for interrogation.
Khawaja told the reporters that the defence counsel raised objections to the testimonies of the
two police officials.
Rai Bashir said the evidence of the police officials was not admissible under articles 38 and 39 of
the Qanoon-i-Shahadat (Law of Evidence) as the confessional statement of the accused before
the police had not evidentiary value.
The judge, however, observed that he would decide this point at the time of judgment.
Aslam Shaikh, brother of accused Adil Shaikh, told the reporters that Shaikh Omar gave a
message for the press through him.
He quoted the alleged mastermind of the US journalist kidnapping as saying that the Jews and
Christians had unleashed an era of oppression on the Muslims, but this was bound to come to an
end very soon and they (Jews and Christians) would soon face the wrath of Almighty Allah.
Shaikh Omar was also quoted as saying that President Gen Pervez Musharraf was responsible for
the killing of 50,000 innocent Afghans during the US-led operation in Afghanistan. He also
urged the people not vote for Gen Musharraf in the upcoming referendum.
Khawaja Naveed also told the reporters that the court issued a show-cause notice to the
investigation officer of the case, Inspector Hameed Ullah Memon, for sitting in the courtroom
during the depositions of the prosecution witnesses.
The counsel said he and other defence attorney raised objection to the presence of the IO in the
courtroom as he was not supposed to be there during the deposition of the prosecution witness.
The judge ordered him to explain his position on Wednesday, otherwise why action not be taken
against him for interfering in the court proceedings.
restaurant near the Metropole Hotel on Jan 23. A video tape received by the US consulate in
The court, which has so far recorded the statement of five prosecution witnesses, put off the
hearing of the case till Wednesday for recording further evidence in the case.
Nasir Abbas, the 32-year-old taxi driver who last dropped the US journalist near the Village
restaurant on Jan 23, had recorded his statement as first prosecution witness on Monday.
KARACHI: Journalist deposes in Pearl case
KARACHI, April 24: An Islamabad-based journalist, appearing as a sixth prosecution witness in

Daniel Pearl kidnapping-cum-murder case, deposed on Wednesday that the US journalist had
held a three-hour meeting with Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh, the prime accused, in his effort to
interview Pir Mubarak Shah Gilani.
Judge Abdul Ghafoor Memon of the Anti-terrorism Court No 2, who is holding the trial inside
the Central Prison, with no reporter or observer attending the court proceedings, put off the
hearing of the case till Thursday for further evidence.
Khwaja Naveed later briefed the newsmen on the court proceedings.
Asif Farooqui, who assisted the reporter of the Wall Street Journal in his research on the links
between Islamic militant groups and Richard C. Ried, the so-called shoe-bomber caught in
France, stated that Daniel Pearl was introduced to him by his predecessor. He said he met Pearl
on Dec 29.
The prosecution witness said that during the meeting, the US journalist told him that the shoe-
bomber was being linked with Pir Mubarak Shah Gilani. He said Pearl desired to interview Pir
Gilani and asked him if he could arrange it for him.
The Islamabad-based journalist, working for a Japanese news organization, stated that one of his
friends, whose name he could not recall, introduced him to Arif in Rawalpindi. He said Arif told
him that he could arrange a meeting with Pir Gilani.
He said Arif gave him the address of Pir Gilani. He said when he along with Pearl reached at that
residence, they learnt that Pir Gilani had moved from there a month ago.
The PW stated that Arif telephoned him on January 11, telling him that he had come in contact
with a close aide of the Pir, Bashir, who could arrange a meeting. He said on the same evening
he along with Daniel Pearl reached the Akbar International Hotel at Rawalpindi, where Bashir,
Arif and Pearl talked for three hours.
Pointing to Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh, the prosecution witness identified him as Bashir.
Asif Farooqi further stated that Pearl left for Peshawar on the same night. He said the US
journalist returned on January 18 and told him that he (Pearl) was leaving for Karachi, where
Bashir (Shaikh Omar) had already arranged his meeting with Pir Gilani.
The prosecution witness said Pearl phoned him in the morning of January 23. He said the US
journalist wanted a quick answer if it was safe to meet Pir Gilani.
He said the wife of the missing journalist phoned him on January 24 telling him that Pearl had
not returned.
He said the police called him to Karachi, where his statement before the police was recorded. He
also identified Shaikh Omar before a judicial magistrate.
During the cross-examination by Khawaja Naveed, counsel for accused Salman Saqib and Adil
Shaikh, the prosecution witness also admitted that the US journalist along with him was also
looking for Maulan Masood Azhar.
He, however, denied the suggestion of the defence counsel to the effect that he with Daniel Pearl
visited the office of the Harkat-ul-Ansar.
To a question by the defence counsel, the prosecution witness said he had read the news about
the arrest of Shaikh Omar in Lahore on Feb 12.
To another query, he said he did not know if Shaikh Omar was taken to Rawalpindi.
The prosecution witness denied a suggestion by Rai Bashir, counsel for Salman Saqib, that he
(PW) and Daniel Pearl were working for Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency, and the CIA of
the US.
Khawaja Naveed told the reporters that the chief prosecutor, Raja Qureshi, complained to the
court that accused Salman Saqib and Adil Shaikh had given him threatening gestures.
The court warned the accused, who simply denied the charge levelled by the prosecutor.
April 26, 2002 Friday Safar 12, 142
KARACHI: AG seeks transfer of Pearl case from ATC-2
KARACHI, April 25: A division bench of the Sindh High Court issued on Thursday notices to
the accused/respondents in the Daniel Pearl kidnapping and murder case for Friday.
The bench, comprising Chief Justice Saiyed Saeed Ashhad and Justice Ghulam Rabbani, was
hearing a criminal miscellaneous application seeking transfer of the case from the trial court, the
anti-terrorism court No 2, headed by Judge Abdul Ghafoor Memon.
The advocate-general Sindh, who has filed the application, has taken the plea that the accused
made threatening gestures to him and prosecution witnesses during the hearing on Wednesday,
but the court failed to take due notice of that.
The AG has also taken the plea that the trial court has not recorded the entire testimony of a
prosecution witness.
After initial arguments, the bench issued notices to the respondents for April 26.
Earlier, trial of the case was transferred from the ATC-3 to the ATC-2 as defence counsel Abdul
Waheed Katpar objected to the trial by Judge Arshad Noor Khan after the prosecution cited four
police officials as witnesses, who were present in the courtroom of ATC-3 when accused Omar
Shaikh was produced for obtaining remand.
The accused allegedly made some statement about Daniel Pearl’s kidnapping and murder.
Mr Katpar maintained that under the circumstances the ATC-3 judge himself became a witness,
so he could not try the case.
He also objected to the transfer of the case to the ATC-4 after which the case was transferred to
the ATC-2.
There are four ATCs functioning in Karachi, and now only the ATC-I is left which is presided
over by Syed Aley Maqbool Zaidi.—APP

KARACHI: Hearing adjourned
KARACHI, April 25: The Daniel Pearl kidnapping-cum-murder case could not proceed on
Thursday as the defence counsel sought adjournment from the court due to the city lawyers’
boycott of courts over the upcoming presidential referendum.
Judge Abdul Ghafoor Memon of the Anti-terrorism Court No 2, who is holding the trial of
Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh, the alleged mastermind of the US journalist kidnapping, and three
other co-accused inside Central Prison Karachi, adjourned the hearing of the case till Friday.
Abdul Waheed Katpar, counsel for the prime accused, and Khawaja Naveed Ahmed, attorney for
accused Fahad Naseem and Adil Shaikh, reached the ATC-2 on Queen’s Road and sought
adjournment.
Advocate-General Raja Qureshi, the chief prosecutor in the case, told Dawn that five prosecution
witnesses were available for recording their testimonies.
“I reached the jail at 10:30am so as to proceed with the case, but the judge had already put off
the hearing till tomorrow (Friday) at the request of the defence counsel,” he added.
KARACHI: Hearing of Pearl case put off
KARACHI, April 26: Hearing of the Daniel Pearl kidnapping-cum-murder could not be held for
the second consecutive day on Friday as the prosecution side did not appear in the trial court.
Judge Abdul Ghafoor Memon of the anti-terrorism court-2, who is holding the trial inside
Central Prison, Karachi, fixed April 30 for the next hearing after waiting for the prosecutors till
12-noon.
Defence lawyers, who had sought a one-day adjournment on Thursday due to the countrywide
boycott of courts by lawyers, however, appear in the court.
When contacted the Advocate-General Sindh, Raja Qureshi, told Dawn that he was busy in the
Sindh High Court in connection with the hearing of his application for transfer of the case from
the ATC-2.
Syed Mohsin Imam, assistant to Abdul Waheed Katpar, counsel for accused Ahmed Omar Saeed
Shaikh, told Dawn that an application had been filed on behalf of their client against the prison
administration.
He said Omar Shaikh, the alleged mastermind of the US journalist kidnapping, and other accused
were being kept in solitary confinement.
In the application, he said, it had been submitted to the court that the accused were not even
being allowed to say prayers with others in the prison.
He said it had been prayed that the accused be kept in the prison according to the provisions of
the jail manual.
Mr Imam said the judge called a report from the prison authorities.
He said an identical application had also been filed by Khawaja Naveed Ahmed, counsel for
Fahad Naseem and Adil Shaikh, on behalf of his clients.
He said Rai Bashir, defence attorney for Salman Saqib, also moved a fresh application for the
medical treatment of his client by a doctor of Aga Khan Hospital. The defence counsel submitted
that his client was earlier being treated in the hospital under the name of Junaid and his medical
file was available at the hospital.
Father of accused Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh, father and brother of accused Salman Saqib and
brother of accused Adil Shaikh met their relations at the prison.
Khawaja Naveed moved an application before the ATC-2, stating that his clients, Shaikh Adil
and Fahad Naseem, had been kept in a death cell in Karachi Central Prison, and he prayed the
court to order their treatment as normal prisoners, PPI adds.
The judge issued notice to the superintendent of Karachi Central Prison to appear in the court on
April 30.
SHC: A division bench of the Sindh High Court adjourned on Friday to April 30 the hearing of
an application by the advocate-general Sindh praying for transfer of the Daniel Pearl kidnapping
and murder case from the anti-terrorism court-2, adds PPI.
The division bench, comprising the Chief Justice, Justice Saiyed Saeed Ashhad, and Justice
Ghulam Rabbani, adjourning the hearing, told the AG Sindh, Raja Qureshi, to provide a copy of
the application to defence lawyer Abdul Waheed Katpar, who submitted before the court that he
had not received copy of the application.
Mr Qureshi, in his application, had submitted before the High Court on Thursday that the ATC-
2, presided over by Judge Abdul Ghafoor Memon, had not been able to control “rude and
abusive behaviour of the accused in the Daniel Pearl case who throughout the proceedings hurled
abuses and threats at the prosecution team, witnesses and others connected with the case.”
May 4, 2002 Saturday Safar 20, 1423
HYDERABAD: Hearing in Pearl case put off till

Monday
By M.H. Khan
HYDERABAD, May 3: The statements of two prosecution

witnesses in the Daniel Pearl case could not be recorded in the
Anti-Terrorism Court here on Friday after the objections were
raised by the defence lawyer. The judge, Syed Ali Ashraf Shah,
adjourned the hearing till Monday with the consent of both the parties.
The defence counsel argued that since another defence lawyer, Rai Basheer, was not present the
court could not record the evidence of the two prosecution witnesses whose identity was also not
disclosed to the defence.
Advocate-General of Sindh Raja Qureshi, however, insisted that both the PWs could be
examined.
The proceedings began at around 10.40am after all the four accused, Ahmed Omar Saeed
Sheikh, Salman Saqib, Adil Sheikh and Fahad Naseem, were produced before the judge.
Strict security arrangements were made on the occasion as a large number of policemen were
deployed in and around the jail building.
The journalists belonging to national and international media were not allowed to enter the jail
premises till 11am, although arrangements were made for them near jail’s canteen. Those who
had accredition were, however, allowed entry at 11.15am where they were briefed by the defence
and state counsel about the progress in the case.
Aslam Sheikh, brother of Adil Sheikh, and Syed Abdul Rauf, father of Salman Saqib, were also
present but they were not allowed to meet the journalists.
Abdul Waheed Katpar, counsel for Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh, said that his client was not
happy with the transfer of the case from Karachi to Hyderabad. He disclosed that all the four
accused had sought the services of K.M. Samdani to move the apex court against the April 30
order of the division bench of Sindh High Court, transferring the case from Karachi to
Hyderabad.
Mr Katpar said that an application would be filed later in the day and he would get a copy of it in
the evening. He added that the prosecution side wanted to record the statement of two witnesses
but he objected on the ground that another counsel, Rai Basheer, was not in attendance,
therefore, the prosecution witnesses could not be examined.
In all, 36 PWs will be examined. Of them, six have deposed before the court, he said, adding that
three witnesses, including a taxi driver Faisal Afridi, DSP Asghar Usman and Inspector Javed
Abbas, had been dropped from the list.
He said that the prosecution side felt insulted after the ATC-2 Judge, Abdul Ghafoor Memon,
issued a show-cause notice to Inspector Rasheed Memon for being present in the court and added
that the Inspector had not submitted reply so far.
Mr Katpar said that there had been no recovery of the body of the deceased journalist as well as
weapon used, the place of offence was yet to be determined, then how would the prosecution
prove its charges against the accused.
The counsel said that the prosecution had to establish the case against the accused beyond any
shadow of doubt. The best piece of evidence the prosecution claimed to have was the video
cassette that had been sent by someone, but again it was not known who had prepared and sent it,
he said.
Barrister Jameel filed power on behalf of wife of Daniel Pearl.
Mr Katpar claimed that the statement of wife of Daniel Pearl, who is also the complainant in the
case, would be recorded after some time.
RELATIVES: Talking to journalists Aslam Sheikh, the brother of Adil Sheikh, said that they
were not allowed by the officials to meet the accused.
He expressed the fear that arrangements being made to extradite all the four accused to the US.
He alleged that because of torture one arm of his brother was not functioning properly.
The proceedings would be held regularly on a day-to-day basis from Monday to Friday.
Abdul Waheed Katpar also withdrew his contempt of court application against President Gen
Pervez Musharraf after a contradiction was issued by the government with regard to the
statement of the president concerning Omar Shaikh.
KARACHI: Indictment of accused in Pearl case on 22nd

KARACHI, April 12: The Anti-terrorism Court No. 3 put off on Friday the hearing of the Daniel
Pearl kidnapping case till 22nd, when Ahmed Saeed Omar Shaikh, the alleged mastermind of the
US journalist’s kidnapping, and three others codefendants would be indicted in the case.
No reporter or observer was allowed to attend the court proceedings, being conducted on the
premises of the Central Prison, Karachi. The defence attorneys later briefed the newsmen on the
proceedings.
Judge Arshad Noor Khan also declared seven absconding accused as proclaimed offenders after
the police process server told the court that Amjad Hussain Farooqui alias Haider Farooqui alias
Hasan, Asif alias Qasim, Hashim, Qari Abdul Qadeer, Hasan alias Ahmed Bhai, Imtiaz Siddiqui
and a person who purchased the Polaroid camera could not be tracked down as they had gone
underground.
“I am innocent and committed no kidnapping or murder”, Abdul Waheed Katpur, the attorney
for Shaikh Umar, quoted his client as telling the court.
Mr Katpur also moved an application of the contempt of court against President Pervaiz
Musharraf on behalf of his client for making a statement to the effect that he wanted to see the
main suspect put to death.
The judge issued notice to the prosecution for the arguments on the maintainability of the
contempt of court application against the President. The application will come up on the next
hearing.
Rai Bashir, a Lahore-based lawyer appearing for accused Salman Saqib, told Dawn that he had
moved an application for the certified copy of the video tape, documenting the murder of the US
journalist.
However, the court dismissed the application telling the defence counsel that the tape was not
available on the court record so far.
Mr Bashir also filed another application for the medical treatment of his client. The judge
allowed the application and ordered the administrator of the hospital of Saqib’s choice to arrange
the examination of the accused by Dr Tabish Chawala on the premises of the prison.
Khawaja Naveed, counsel for Adil Shaikh and Fahad Naseem, said that the court allowed the
mother and brother of accused Adil to visit him. He said he also requested the court to allow the
relatives of his clients to attend the court proceedings. The advocate general sought time in that
connection.
The US journalist, whose body has not yet been found, was allegedly kidnapped from in front of
a restaurant near Metropole Hotel on Jan 23. A video tape received by the US consulate in
In his application of contempt of court against General Musharraf, Saeed stated that being the
head of the state, he is the fountain of power as well as the fountain of justice.
“But to demand the sentence of death for Omar is to tell the courts to convict and sentence the
accused to capital punishment”.
He further stated: “The effect of the statement issued by the respondent may place the judges
upon the horns of a dilemma to hold themselves accountable to the “Mighty Musharraf” or to
Mighty Allah”.
The applicant prayed: “In the light of foregoing submissions, it is respectfully submitted that the
honourable court may be pleased to issue process against the respondent under section 3 and 4 of
the Contempt of Court Act, 1976, read with Article 2A and 204 of the Constitution of the Islamic
Republic of Pakistan and if it is proved that the respondent has committed a contempt then the
honourable court may be pleased to proceed against the respondent according to the law of the
land”.
Meanwhile, the father of Omar Saeed Shaikh, said he did not expect a fair trial. “We are not
going to have a fair trial”, he said.
While talking to Dawn, he said: “I handed over my son to the authorities believing that justice
would be done”. He said that the justice system in Pakistan and the trial of his son seemed a
mockery of the criminal justice system after the statement of the President.
Saeed’s father said: “My son is being sentenced to death, even before the trial, by the President,
who is otherwise supposed to provide justice to every citizen of the country.
KARACHI: SHC upholds death penalty by ATC: Kidnapping, murder case
By Our Reporter
KARACHI, April 16: The anti-terrorism appellate bench of the Sindh High Court on Tuesday
upheld the conviction and sentence of Shaikh Mohammed Amjad who was awarded death
sentence by the Anti-Terrorism Court No-III, Karachi, for kidnapping for ransom Barrister
Shakir Latif and for murdering him.
The bench, comprising Justice Muhammad Roshan Essani and Justice Mujeebullah Siddiqui,
announced the 111-page judgement while dismissing appeal and accepting confirmation
reference.
Shaikh Amjad, a businessman, had kidnapped his next-door neighbour, Shakir Latif, a 23-year-
old lawyer, for ransom on July 29. He killed the victim, giving him poison in a drink, at a house
he had rented within the limits of Darakhshan police.
The police had recovered the body of the victim on a lead given by Shaikh Amjad. Shakir Latif
had returned to Pakistan after doing his Bar-at-law from Lincoln’s Inn.
Shaikh Amjad was awarded double death sentence on two counts, one for kidnapping the lawyer
for ransom and the other for murdering him. The court had also ordered him to pay Rs200,000 as
Diyat to the victim’s family.
The convict filed an appeal in the SHC on Oct 15 last year.
Authored by Justice Mujeebullah Siddiqui, the bench in its judgment found that there were much
more stronger circumstances leading to the involvement of appellant in the abduction and death
of Shakir Latif.
The bench held that the prosecution had established beyond any doubt that the deceased was last
seen in the company of appellant, he thereafter disappeared and was not traceable for several
days. The appellant made several telephone calls to Fazal-ur-Rehman, father of the deceased.
This fact is proved with the help of CPLC workers who kept the telephone of complainant under
observation. It was traced out that on Aug 4, 2001 the appellant was talking to father of the
deceased from a Telecard Telephone Booth in Saddar. The appellant was arrested from the
Telecard Telephone Booth while talking to the father of deceased and then he led to the recovery
of body from the car of deceased parked inside the Bungalow No. 51/1.
It was also established that Bungalow No. 51/1 was in the possession of the appellant which was
established with the evidence of prosecution witness-11 Mehboob Younus, Chowkidar of
Bungalow No. 50/2. The accused had admitted in his statement that he had conversation with
that witness at Bungalow No. 51/1, twice before the incident.
The prosecution had also established that the appellant led to the recovery of shoes and gloves of
the deceased and a law book which was with the deceased. It was proved by prosecution witness
No 12, Ejaz Ahmed, Advocate, partner of the deceased in the law firm. The prosecution also
established that the appellant led to the recovery of juice bottle and the Potassium Cyanide,
which was mixed with the juice and which was found to be the cause of death of the deceased.
The circumstantial evidence consisting of recovery of the body of the deceased and other
incriminating articles lead to the presumption of involvement of the appellant in the abduction
for ransom and murder of the deceased, the judgment said.
The corroboration was available in the extra-judicial confession proved through prosecution
witnesses Ahmed Chinoy, Ejaz Latif and the admission of the appellant contained in his hand-
written statement (Ex.73).
The bench was convinced beyond any doubt that the evidence led by the prosecution and the
admission made by the appellant collectively established the guilt of the appellant for abduction
of deceased Shakir Latif for ransom and causing his death by administering poison.
The bench held that the appellant was rightly convicted by the trial court on the charge of
abduction for ransom and murder.
The bench found that the appellant preplanned the abduction and murder of the deceased in
pursuance of his pre-meditated planning of administering poison to the deceased and thereafter
attempted to knock out ransom money from his father.
“It is a case of cold-blooded murder and the entire conduct of the appellant is highly callous. A
young blooming barrister was done to death in a gruesome manner, sending a wave of shock to
the entire community of advocates, creating sense of fear and insecurity in the public, and,
therefore, there are no mitigating circumstances for awarding lessor punishment. The conviction
and sentence awarded by the learned trial court is, therefore, upheld. The confirmation
reference is accepted and the appeal stands dismissed”, the court held.
The case involved arguments on the jurisdiction of the court and interpretation of the ATA laws
and Qanoon-i-Shahadat.
The counsel for the appellant Shaikh Mir Mohammed had mainly objected to the jurisdiction of
anti-terrorism court, established under Section 13 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997.
According to him, the condition precedent was that in addition to the commission of scheduled
offence, it should be coupled with the act of terrorism as defined in Section 6 of the A.T.A.
According to the counsel, it was provided in the III-Schedule to the A.T.A. in pursuance of
Section 2(t) thereof, that any act of terrorism within the meaning of A.T.A. or any offence
punishable under the ATA or any attempt to commit, or any aid or abatement of, any conspiracy
to commit, any of the aforesaid offences shall mean as scheduled offence.
He had further argued that under subsection (2) of Section 6 of the ATA, read with Sub-section
(1)(a) of the said section, an action shall fall within the meaning of “terrorism” if it involved the
doing of anything that caused death or involved doing of anything that was likely to cause death
or involved a danger to a person’s life or any act which involved kidnapping for ransom,
hostage-taking or hijacking, shall mean the act of terrorism, provided the conditions spelt in
Section 6(1)(b) of ATA, were also fulfilled.
Raja Qureshi, Advocate General Sindh, and Ilyas Khan, Special Public Prosecutor, submitted
that the appellant could have submitted an application before the ATC under Section 23 of the
ATA, for transfer of the case to the court having jurisdiction but it was not done, and, therefore,
the appellant cannot be allowed to take this plea at the appellate stage. But the bench was not
persuaded to agree with the submission because the question of jurisdiction was a question of
law and could always be raised by any party at any stage, including the appeal.
The Advocate General, had submitted that the offences under Section 302 PPC and 365-A PPC
were admittedly the scheduled offences and the prosecution had collected sufficient material to
show that the incident was so callous, brutal, shocking and gruesome that it sent a waive of
insecurity and fear in the society at large. He had further submitted on the wordings used in
Section 6(1)(b).
The court after examining the respective contentions held that the prosecution had collected
sufficient material to create a nexus between the scheduled offences allegedly committed by the
appellant and Sections 6, 7 and 8 of ATA, as held by the Supreme Court in Mehran Ali’s case.
The court found that the prosecution had brought sufficient material on record to establish that
the act committed by the appellant fell within the purview of Sections 6 and 7 of ATA. The
offences allegedly committed by the appellant were scheduled offences and therefore, both the
conditions precedent for conferring jurisdiction on the ATC were fulfilled.
M. Ilyas Khan, Special Public Prosecutor had contended that the last seen evidence stood
established by the admission of the appellant himself even in his statement under Section 342 Cr.
P.C. and his statement on oath under Section 340(2)Cr.P.C. and Pw.7, Haji Altaf Hussain Mangi,
who was totally independent and had no reason to falsely implicate the appellant. This witness
had stated that he had seen deceased in the company of appellant near Bungalow No. 51/1, at
about 5-00 or 5-15 p.m. on the day of incident i.e. 29-7-2001.
On the question whether the evidence was sufficient for conviction of accused / appellant for the
commission of abduction for ransom punishable under Section 365-A Cr. P.C. read with Section
7(2) of the ATA and the offence of committing murder punishable under Section 302 PPC, the
court ruled in affirmative.
Father of the deceased after the announcement of judgment demanded public hanging for the
convict.
KARACHI: Trial court for Pearl case changed
By Our Reporter
KARACHI, April 19: The government on Friday changed the trial court for proceeding against
the accused in Daniel Pearl murder case.
Judge Abdul Ghafoor Memon of the ATC-II will now hear the case in Karachi Central Prison,
instead of Judge Arshad Noor Khan of the ATC-III.
The decision was taken by the Chief Justice of the Sindh High Court, Saiyed Saeed Ashhad, after
the division bench he was presiding over allowed the application of the principal accused Ahmad
Saeed Omar Shaikh who had raised a point contending that Judge Arshad Noor Khan was not
competent to try the case, because according to the challan, he had himself become a witness.
The bench comprised chief justice of the Sindh High Court and Justice Ghulam Rabbani.
At the outset of the proceedings on Friday, the state agreed to transfer trial of the case from the
court of Judge Arshad Noor to any other judge of the Anti-terrorism Court, provided it did not
cause a delay in the trial which is to commence on April 22 in Karachi Central Prison.
The position was taken by Sindh advocate-general Raja Qureshi when application of Omar
Shaikh came up before the division bench.
Mr Qureshi said the decision was taken to enhance transparency and impartiality of the trial.
Counsel for Omar Shaikh, Mr Abdul Waheed Katpar, cited various cases in support of his
contention that Mr Arshad Noor Khan cannot try the case because in the list of prosecution
witnesses the note in the margin against PWs 17 to 20 made the judge a witness.
Mr Abdul Hafeez Lakho, a former advocate-general who was appointed amicus curiae, was also
supportive of the idea of transferring the case. He said in view of the citations, there would be no
harm if the case was transferred to another judge.
Mr Katpar had relied on Article 4 (c) of Qanoon-i-Shahadat.
The advocate-general contended that answer to clause 4 was available in 304 (a) PPC, which
pertained to proof of Qatl-i-Amd.
Counsel Abdul Waheed Katpar had contended that in the list of prosecution witnesses the note in
the margin against PWs 17 to 20 made the notified judge a witness.
He also cited text of the challan in support of his contention.
The counsel had maintained that it was stated in the margin against the four PWs under a bracket
that when accused Omar Shaikh was taken to the court of Judge Arshad Noor Khan for obtaining
his remand, the principal accused had stated: “I have abducted Daniel Pearl”; “Daniel Pearl is
dead”; “I do not wish to defend myself”, and “I know I will be extradited to the US”.
Thus the prosecution had itself made Mr Arshad Noor Khan a witness in the case. It was
immaterial whether they examine him as a witness or not.
The fact remained that Judge Khan had been made a witness in the case, the applicant had
claimed.
April 23, 2002 Tuesday Safar 9, 1423
KARACHI, April 22: Ahmed Saeed Omar Shaikh, the alleged mastermind of a US
journalist’s kidnapping, and three other accused denied on Monday their involvement in
the case when an anti-terrorism court formally indicted them.
The four accused pleaded “not guilty” when Judge Abdul Ghafoor Memon of the ATC-2
read out the charges of kidnapping, murder, abetment and criminal conspiracy under
sections 356-A, 302, 109 and 120-B of PPC. They were also charged with creating
harassment and terror in society under sections 7, 8 and 11 of the Anti-terrorism Act.
Except for the three defence counsel and court staff, no one was allowed to attend the
court proceedings, being conducted inside Central Prison, Karachi. The media persons
who thronged the jail at 8:30am, waited outside for the defence lawyers till 3:30pm.
Khwaja Naveed Ahmed, attorney for Fahad Naseem and Asil Shaikh, later briefed
newsmen on the court proceedings.
At the outset, ASI Tariq, the process server, appeared in the court and informed that he
could not track down the seven absconding accused.
The court separated the case of the absconders — Amjad Hussain Farooqui alias
Haider Farooqui alias Hasan, Asif alias Qasim, Hashim, Qari Abdul Qadeer, Hasan
alias Ahmed Bhai, Imtiaz Siddiqui and a person who bought a Polaroid camera —, and
the court ordered to keep the case on a dormant file.
The defence counsel said the prime accused stated that he did not recognize this court
when the judge formally arraigned him in the case. “I want to be tried by a Shariat
court,” he said.
The defence counsel said the judge recorded his remarks on the paper containing the
charges.
Later, the prosecution produced its first and star witness, the taxi driver, Nasir Abbas,
who last drove and dropped Daniel Pearl, the US journalist. The taxi driver also
identified the prime suspect as one of the kidnappers.
The 32-year-old taxi driver deposed on oath that on Jan 23 a taxi drier, Faisal Afridi, told
him at Do Talwar in Clifton that some people at Zamzama Street in Clifton needed two
cabs for Sheraton Hotel.
The taxi driver said the passengers were a journalist, his wife and another woman who
were already standing there.
He said a white car, occupied by four people, stopped ahead of his cab as he reached
near Village Restaurant. He said Ahmed Saeed Omar Shaikh was the man who got
down from the white car and made the journalist sit in his car.
Abdul Waheed Katpar, attorney for Omar Shaikh, Rai Bashir, attorney for Salman
Saqib, and Khwaja Naveed, attorney for Fahad Naseem, also cross-examined the
prosecution witness.
During the cross-examination by Khwaja Naveed, the taxi driver said he did not know
how far the residence of the late prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was from Do Talwar.
He also said his brother was in the police department.
Abdul Waheed Katpar withdrew his application of contempt of court against President
Pervez Musharraf.
The US journalist, whose body has not yet been found, was allegedly kidnapped in front
of a restaurant near Metropole Hotel on Jan 23. A video-tape received by the US
consulate in Karachi on Feb 21 documented his murder.
The judge put off the hearing of the case to Tuesday when the prosecution would
produce more witnesses against the accused.
KARACHI, April 24: An Islamabad-based journalist, appearing as a sixth prosecution

witness in Daniel Pearl kidnapping-cum-murder case, deposed on Wednesday that the
US journalist had held a three-hour meeting with Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh, the prime
accused, in his effort to interview Pir Mubarak Shah Gilani.
Judge Abdul Ghafoor Memon of the Anti-terrorism Court No 2, who is holding the trial
inside the Central Prison, with no reporter or observer attending the court proceedings,
put off the hearing of the case till Thursday for further evidence.
Khwaja Naveed later briefed the newsmen on the court proceedings.
Asif Farooqui, who assisted the reporter of the Wall Street Journal in his research on
the links between Islamic militant groups and Richard C. Ried, the so-called shoe-
bomber caught in France, stated that Daniel Pearl was introduced to him by his
predecessor. He said he met Pearl on Dec 29.
The prosecution witness said that during the meeting, the US journalist told him that the
shoe-bomber was being linked with Pir Mubarak Shah Gilani. He said Pearl desired to
interview Pir Gilani and asked him if he could arrange it for him.
The Islamabad-based journalist, working for a Japanese news organization, stated that
one of his friends, whose name he could not recall, introduced him to Arif in Rawalpindi.
He said Arif told him that he could arrange a meeting with Pir Gilani.
He said Arif gave him the address of Pir Gilani. He said when he along with Pearl
reached at that residence, they learnt that Pir Gilani had moved from there a month ago.
The PW stated that Arif telephoned him on January 11, telling him that he had come in
contact with a close aide of the Pir, Bashir, who could arrange a meeting. He said on
the same evening he along with Daniel Pearl reached the Akbar International Hotel at
Rawalpindi, where Bashir, Arif and Pearl talked for three hours.
Pointing to Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh, the prosecution witness identified him as
Bashir.
Asif Farooqi further stated that Pearl left for Peshawar on the same night. He said the
US journalist returned on January 18 and told him that he (Pearl) was leaving for
Karachi, where Bashir (Shaikh Omar) had already arranged his meeting with Pir Gilani.
The prosecution witness said Pearl phoned him in the morning of January 23. He said
the US journalist wanted a quick answer if it was safe to meet Pir Gilani.
He said the wife of the missing journalist phoned him on January 24 telling him that
Pearl had not returned.
He said the police called him to Karachi, where his statement before the police was
recorded. He also identified Shaikh Omar before a judicial magistrate.
During the cross-examination by Khawaja Naveed, counsel for accused Salman Saqib
and Adil Shaikh, the prosecution witness also admitted that the US journalist along with
him was also looking for Maulan Masood Azhar.
He, however, denied the suggestion of the defence counsel to the effect that he with
Daniel Pearl visited the office of the Harkat-ul-Ansar.
To a question by the defence counsel, the prosecution witness said he had read the
news about the arrest of Shaikh Omar in Lahore on Feb 12.
To another query, he said he did not know if Shaikh Omar was taken to Rawalpindi.
The prosecution witness denied a suggestion by Rai Bashir, counsel for Salman Saqib,
that he (PW) and Daniel Pearl were working for Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency,
and the CIA of the US.
Khawaja Naveed told the reporters that the chief prosecutor, Raja Qureshi, complained
to the court that accused Salman Saqib and Adil Shaikh had given him threatening
gestures.
The court warned the accused, who simply denied the charge levelled by the
prosecutor.
KARACHI: Hearing adjourned

KARACHI, April 25: The Daniel Pearl kidnapping-cum-murder case could not proceed on
Thursday as the defence counsel sought adjournment from the court due to the city lawyers’
boycott of courts over the upcoming presidential referendum.
Judge Abdul Ghafoor Memon of the Anti-terrorism Court No 2, who is holding the trial of
Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh, the alleged mastermind of the US journalist kidnapping, and three
other co-accused inside Central Prison Karachi, adjourned the hearing of the case till Friday.
Abdul Waheed Katpar, counsel for the prime accused, and Khawaja Naveed Ahmed, attorney for
accused Fahad Naseem and Adil Shaikh, reached the ATC-2 on Queen’s Road and sought
adjournment.
Advocate-General Raja Qureshi, the chief prosecutor in the case, told Dawn that five prosecution
witnesses were available for recording their testimonies.
“I reached the jail at 10:30am so as to proceed with the case, but the judge had already put off
the hearing till tomorrow (Friday) at the request of the defence counsel,” he added.

Abduction Cases

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Abduction Cases

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

January 11, 2002 Friday Shawwal 26, 1422

KARACHI: 1,745 abduction cases reported last year

January 19, 2002 Saturday Ziqa'ad 4, 1422

February 3, 2002 Sunday Ziqa’ad 19, 1422

KARACHI: Daniel Pearl remains traceless

By Our Staff Reporter

February 6, 2002 Wednesday Ziqa’ad 22, 1422

KARACHI: Daniel Pearl issue may soon be resolved

February 12, 200 2 Tuesday Ziqa’ad 28, 1422

February 13, 2002 Wednesday Ziqa’ad 29, 1422

February 15, 2002 Friday Zilhaj 2, 1422

KARACHI: Police believe Pearl is alive

By Our Staff Reporter

February 15, 2002 Friday Zilhaj 2, 1422

KARACHI: Suspect owns up to sending e-mail: Pearl case

February 23, 2002 Saturday Zilhaj 10, 1422

KARACHI: Pearl’s widow ‘satisfied’ with investigation

By Our Staff Reporter

February 26, 2002 Tuesday Zilhaj 13, 1422

KARACHI: Court extends remand of suspects in Pearl case

February 27, 2002 Wednesday Zilhaj 14, 1422

KARACHI: Witness identifies Omar Shaikh in court

March 2, 2002 Saturday Zilhaj 17, 1422

March 6, 2002 Wednesday Zilhaj 21, 1422

By Our Staff Reporter

March 6, 2002 Wednesday Zilhaj 21, 1422

KARACHI: Plea against Omar’s extradition disposed of

March 7, 2002 Thursday Zilhaj 22, 1422

KARACHI: Prime witness identifies Omer Shaikh as Pearl’s kidnapper

According to the investigators, Nasir appeared as prosecution witness voluntarily.

March 10, 2002 Sunday Zilhaj 25, 1422

KARACHI: Taxi driver records statement in court: Daniel Pearl case

Mr Khawaja said the opportunity to cross-examine a prosecution witness was to be provided to

March 12, 2002 Tuesday Zilhaj 27, 1422

KARACHI: Court allows counsel to meet accused: Daniel Pearl case

March 13, 2002 Wednesday Zilhaj 28, 1422

KARACHI: Omar’s remand extended in Daniel case

March 16, 2002 Saturday Muharram 1, 1423

KARACHI: Five women, three men arrested for kidnapping: 11 babies

By Our Staff Reporter

The children were sent to the Edhi Child Home in Mithadar.

March 16, 2002 Saturday Muharram 1, 1423

KARACHI: Decision on Omar’s extradition after Musharraf’s return

Question was asked whether the criminal court proceedings

March 23, 2002 Saturday Muharram 8, 1423

KARACHI: Omar, co-accused remanded in judicial custody

March 25, 2002 Monday Muharram 10, 1423

KARACHI: A team of counsel to defend Omar

KARACHI: Plea against jail trial of Omar dismissed

April 6, 2002 Saturday Muharram 22, 1423

April 13, 2002 Saturday Muharram 29, 1423

KARACHI: Indictment of accused in Pearl case on 22nd

By Our Staff Reporter

April 17, 2002 Wednesday Safar 3, 142

KARACHI: Omar’s petition comes up before SHC

The matter was adjourned to April 18.

April 17, 2002 Wednesday Safar 3, 142

The convict filed an appeal in the SHC on Oct 15 last year.

KARACHI: Man claims missing child after four years

April 20, 2002 Saturday Safar 6, 1423

KARACHI: Trial court for Pearl case changed

Mr Katpar had relied on Article 4 (c) of Qanoon-i-Shahadat.

He also cited text of the challan in support of his contention.