QUETTA: The murder case of senior Supreme Court lawyer Abdul Razzaq Shar, killed in a drive-by shooting in Quetta on Tuesday, was registered against PTI chief Imran Khan on Wednesday.
The first information report (FIR) was registered on the complaint of Advocate Siraj Ahmed, son of slain Abdul Razzaq Shar at Quetta’s Shaheed Jamil police station.
Advocate Ahmad, in his complaint, alleged that his father was killed at the behest of PTI chief Imran Khan.
Unidentified assailants shot dead Advocate Shar near Alamo Chowk on Airport Road on Tuesday. Police said that the deceased was on the way to the Balochistan High Court when his vehicle came under attack by unknown men armed with automatic weapons.
The lawyer received 15 bullet injuries and died on the spot. Condemning the killing, lawyers’ bodies had boycotted court proceedings across the province and announced three days of mourning.
Meanwhile, the government and the PTI had traded blame over the incident, with both sides accusing the other of having a role in the killing.
Prime minister’s aide Attaullah Tarar had alleged that the lawyer was killed at the behest of Imran to allegedly evade accountability in a treason case while PTI spokesperson Raoof Hassan had accused Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Interior Minister Rana Sanaullah of being behind the murder.
It may be recalled that Shar had filed a constitutional petition against the PTI chief in the Balochistan High Court, seeking proceedings against the ex-premier under Article 6 that pertained to high treason. His petition said that Imran Khan should be tried under Article 6 in light of the apex court decision which had recommended legal action against Imran Khan and Qasim Suri for illegally dissolving the National Assembly after the joint opposition had moved a no-trust motion against the PTI government in April 2022.
It invoked sections 302 (intentional murder), 109 (punishment for abetment if the act abetted is committed in consequence and where no express provision is made for its punishment) and 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of a common intention) of the Pakistan Penal Code, read with Sections 6 and 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997.
According to the FIR, Ahmed told police that he received information at 9:40am on June 6 that his father had been taken to Civil Hospital after being shot. “I immediately reached Civil Hospital where I found my father’s dead body covered in blood,” the FIR quoted him as saying.
Pointing out that his father had filed a petition under Article 6 of the Constitution against the PTI chief, he said he was “certain” about the involvement of the former premier and others from the PTI in his father’s murder because of this case.
According to the complainant, unidentified men on a motorcycle “blindly fired” at his father at Airport Road at 9:20am while he was on his way to the court.
He alleged that his father was killed at the PTI chief’s behest, adding that Shar had also told him that he had been receiving threats in connection with the case filed against Imran. The complainant sought legal action against the PTI chief.
The FIR said police also reached the hospital after receiving information about Shar’s murder and found his body covered in blood.
It was found after a “cursory examination” of the body that the deceased had suffered eight wounds on his face, neck, right arm, chest, waist and right leg, the FIR stated.
It added that the the said information was provided to the doctor on duty for post-mortem and other necessary procedure.
Lawyers boycott court proceedings
Meanwhile, lawyers continued to boycott court proceedings across Balochistan for a second day on Wednesday.
Quetta Bar Association President Abid Kakar said the boycott would continue for three days, saying the black coats will not sit quietly until Shar’s murderers are arrested. He demanded a transparent investigation into Shar’s killing.
In a separate statement, the Balochistan High Court Bar Association condemned the government’s allegations against the PTI chief.
“A responsible government official blamed the leader of a political party for the murder without taking the lawyers’ associations and the deceased’s family into confidence,” the statement said, adding that the allegations were levelled for “political gains”.
The statement highlighted that the government’s accusations were an “attempt to influence the investigation”.
The association demanded that restraint be observed in issuing such “careless statements” and demanded that the FIR of the murder be lodged immediately.
