SHC recalls man’s bail in father-in-law, daughter killing case

The Sindh High Court (SHC) has recalled pre-arrest bail of a man allegedly involved in the killing of his father-in-law and seven-month-old daughter during a family dispute.

Sikandar Javed and his mother Irum Naz were booked by the police for murdering Zubair, father-in-law of Sikander, and his seven-month-old daughter during a scuffle in the New Town area.

According to the prosecution, Sikandar had strained relations with his wife Farah and a quarrel took place between Sikandar and Zubair over the matrimonial dispute, which resulted in the deaths of Zubair and the infant girl.

The applicant’s counsel submitted that they were falsely implicated in the case as screenshots of CCTV footage showed that the deceased man had left the house of the applicants in a conscious and sound condition and he had gone to his house along with the minor girl by driving his own car.

He submitted that the case had become a case of different versions as in the first version, it had not been alleged that the applicant caused a blow to the head of the deceased man with an ashtray and the second version of the complainant that was recorded on July 24, 2024, it was stated that the post-mortem of the deceased man showed the time between injury and death was 10 to 15 minutes that showed that the deceased had left the house of the applicant in a sound and conscious state and he had received the injury in his own house.

It was argued that there was a delay of more than 22 hours in the registration of an FIR, hence the case against him and his mother merited further inquiry. The SHC was told by the applicant that the guards of the building where the incident allegedly took place had also been examined and none had supported the version of the complainant as each of the guards had confirmed the fact that the deceased man had not been injured when he left the house of the applicants.

A counsel for the complainant and additional prosecutor general opposed bail to the applicants. A single bench of the SHC headed by Justice Mohammad Iqbal Kalhoro after hearing the arguments observed that the witnesses had alleged that during the course of dispute when Zubair tried to make Sikandar understand the situation, he started beating him on his chest, dragged him inside the room, took out a pistol and pointed it to him and when his wife Farah called neighbours to intervene and save her father, he put down the pistol but gave a blow to his father-in-law’s head with an ashtray made of glass.

The high court observed that these statements were recorded on the third day of the incident but that delay per se would not be considered fatal to the prosecution case for making a tentative assessment of material on an application which had been filed for grant of pre-arrest bail, a concession extraordinary in nature and meant only to save innocent persons from arrest and humiliation in a criminal case in which they had been falsely implicated.

The high court observed that the effect of any delay in recording the statements required deeper appreciation of evidence which could only be undertaken during the trial.

The bench observed that other witnesses like Bilawal, a watchman, had also prima facie supported the prosecution case by disclosing that when Zubair returned to his house, his granddaughter was in his lap and he was bleeding and the post-mortem also suggested that he died because of a head injury, which as per version of the eyewitnesses was caused to him by Sikandar.

The SHC observed that CCTV footage and the fact whether or not in CCTV footage injury of the victim was visible would also be examined during the trial as apparently the internal injury in the first instance as a result of the blow could not be ruled out.

Regarding charges against the mother of Sikandar, the high court observed that there was no specific allegation levelled by the prosecution witnesses and she was let off by the police during investigation as no reasonable material connecting her with the offence was found. The SHC observed that Sikandar was not entitled to pre-arrest bail and recalled his pre-arrest bail but confirmed the pre-arrest bail of his mother.