ISLAMABAD: A district and sessions court in Islamabad has halted proceedings in the case of journalist Arshad Sharif’s killing due to what it described as a “lack of interest” from the prosecution. In October of the previous year, someone shot and killed Arshad Sharif in Kenya.
On September 9, a civil judge and judicial magistrate issued non-bailable arrest warrants against the spouse of the slain journalist, the producer of a private television channel, and other witnesses. The court took this action because they repeatedly failed to appear before the court to provide their statements in the case.
The judge had summoned Sumiyya Arshad, producer Ali Usman, and other prosecution witnesses multiple times to record their testimony, but they did not appear, leading to the issuance of warrants. In March of this year, the judge issued bailable arrest warrants for all the witnesses to compel their attendance, but this was also unsuccessful.
According to sources familiar with the court proceedings, the judge has to submit a report to the Supreme Court regarding the developments in the Arshad Sharif murder case. However, the absence of witnesses has been hindering progress, which prompted the issuance of warrants to push the case forward.
Witness Claims She Did Not Receive Court Summons
However, Summaiya, one of the witnesses, claimed that she had not received a summon from the court and learned about the warrants through media reports. She mentioned that she was aware of the Supreme Court’s suo motu case regarding her husband’s murder and has been present and available on all related dates.
During a recent hearing, the prosecution witnesses once again failed to appear, leading the judge to suspend proceedings. The court’s order stated that the prosecution displayed a “lack of interest” in recording evidence in the case despite numerous opportunities.
The order further mentioned that a notice had been issued to the state during a previous hearing, inquiring why the case file should not be archived. In light of these circumstances, the court decided to halt the proceedings and allowed the complainant/prosecution to apply for a future date when they could produce all prosecution witnesses.
The court directed to place the completed case file in the record room until further orders.
