SC acquits Shahrukh Jatoi, others in 2012 Shahzeb murder case


The Supreme Court on Tuesday acquitted Shahrukh Jatoi as well as his cohorts in the Shahzeb Khan murder case.

A three- judge bench, headed by Justice Ijazul Ahsan, and comprising Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, heard the case.

An Anti-Terrorism Court(ATC) had awarded the death penalty to Jatoi and his abettor Siraj Ali Talpur for Shahzeb’s murder in 2012 following a petty disagreement. Siraj’s youngish family, Sajjad Ali Talpur, and domestic coadjutor Ghulam Murtaza Lashari had been handed life rulings.

A couple of months after the judgment was passed, still, Shahzeb’s parents had issued a formal amnesty for the cons, approved by the Sindh High Court(SHC).

Despite the amnesty, still, the death penalty had been upheld because of the addition of terrorism charges to the case — over until the SHC dropped the charges and ordered a retrial in the case.

The SHC, while hearing prayers against the conviction, had latterly changed the death rulings into life imprisonment. latterly, all four indicted had approached the Supreme Court.

During the hail moment, their counsel, Latif Khosa, noted that the formal amnesty had formerly been issued. His guests had no intention to spread terror, he argued.

Latterly, the court acquitted all four people. A detailed order is awaited.

Shahzeb Khan’s murder
On the night of December 24, 2012, 20- time-old Shahzeb Khan, the son of a police functionary, had been plugged down in Karachi’s Defence Housing Authority. He was returning home with his family from a marriage.

Shahzeb was killed for picking a fight with one of the suspects ’ retainers, who had verbally hovered and wearied his family.

Also principal justice Iftikhar Chaudhry had taken suo motu notice of the incident, which sparked wide outrage across the country through journals, television channels and social media.

As the high indicted belonged to important feudal families of Sindh, the incident had touched off a civil debate over whether the country’s nobility could be held responsible for crimes they committed.

Leave A Reply