The defense questions the absence of eyewitnesses and the convict’s confession under police torture
HYDERABAD:
The trial for the brutal murder of renowned Sindhi poet Dr Allah Bux alias Akash Ansari culminated in less than a year when the judge handed down the death sentence to his stepson.
The Hyderabad Model Criminal Court I sentenced Shah Lateef Ansari to death after finding him guilty of brutally killing his adoptive father and then setting his body on fire on February 15, 2025 at his rented residence in Hyderabad.
“It is worth mentioning here that there is no direct account of any eyewitness of the incident,” underlines the order passed by Additional First Session Judge Tasawar Ali.
“However, I rely on the evidence last seen: a chain of incriminating circumstances that, when considered collectively, point unerringly toward the defendant’s guilt.”
Dr Ansari had suffered 21 stab wounds, according to the post-mortem report prepared by Dr Abdul Hameed Mughal, legal officer of Medico. The poet’s death was caused by hemorrhagic hemorrhage and damage to vital organs such as the lungs and not by the fire that had burned his body and his bedroom.
Meanwhile, Lateef pleaded not guilty. His lawyer, advocate Suhail Rajput, had argued during the hearings that Lateef’s confession before civil judge and judicial magistrate Abdul Qadir Khoso was recorded under duress because he was subjected to torture in police custody. He further maintained that there was no eyewitness to the incident and no independent witness has been called in the case either.
The police have based their case on circumstantial evidence. Weak and contradictory medical and forensic materials, he stated. “The case that the accused made calls [to Rescue 1122] “Instead of extinguishing the fire, it is not in itself proof of murder,” he added. He also cited the reluctance of Meera, his sister, to record her statement in court as a weakness in the prosecution’s case. Lateef was an adopted son of Dr. Ansari, but Meera was his real daughter.
The lawyer also questioned the police’s claim that Lateef was a drug addict and questioned what medical and psychological treatment was being provided to the accused in police and jail custody.
The judge, however, stated in the order that the Prosecutor’s Office has established charges against the accused “… it has now been resolved that the conviction can be based solely on the confession even if it is retracted, if it is determined to be true and voluntary.” The civil judge stated before the court that he had recorded the confessional statement after recording all the legal formalities.
