KARACHI, April 30: Venue and trial court for the Daniel Pearl case was shifted to Hyderabad after a division bench of the Sindh High Court here on Tuesday allowed advocate-general’s plea on the premise of security, sensitivity and seriousness of the case.

The division bench, comprising Chief Justice Saiyed Saeed Ashhad and Justice Ghulam Rabbani, ordered that the case be transferred to the court of Judge Ali Ashraf Shah and proceedings be fixed on May 3 inside the Hyderabad Central Prison. Today’s change was the third since the proceedings began against the principal accused Ahmad Omar Saeed Shaikh and others.

When the application came up before the division bench, Sindh Advocate-General Raja Qureshi submitted that the venue for trial at Karachi was under threat of attack to kill and destroy the incriminating evidence against the accused persons.

Therefore, he argued, it had become all the more necessary for the safety of the prosecution team, prosecution witnesses and for the safe administration of justice that the venue be shifted to some place other than Karachi as deemed fit under the circumstances.

Abdul Waheed Katpar, counsel for Omar Shaikh, opposed the plea, saying whatever was apprehended by the advocate-general could happen anywhere. So, how long the judge will be changed and the venue will be shifted?

The advocate-general had on Monday filed an application under Section 561-A of the Cr.PC, claiming that he was receiving threatening and abusive calls with a demand that the AG with his team should not proceed with the matter against the accused.

The respondents are facing trial under Sections 365-A, 302, and 109 of the PPC read with Sections 7, 8 and 11 of the Anti-Terrorism Act.

The case was initially assigned to an anti-terrorism judge, Arshad Noor Khan, who had fixed the proceedings to commence from April 5, in the Karachi Central Prison.

As a consequence, a special miscellaneous application number 91/2002 was filed by the respondents before the division bench on the premise that the said judge had been disqualified from trying the case against the respondents, as when the respondent No 1 was produced before the said transferee Judge for obtaining his remand, the respondent had made the following statements before the said Judge: “I have kidnapped Daniel Pearl”; “Daniel Pearl is dead”; “I do not want to defend myself”; and “I know I will be extradited to USA”.

After hearing, the court had directed the transfer of the case of the respondent and others from ATC-III to ATC-II presided over by Abdul Ghafoor Memon.

Simultaneously, it was directed by the division bench that the case would be taken up by the ATC-II on April 22. Between April 22 and 24, the prosecution had examined six prosecution witnesses inside the Karachi Central Prison.

From day one of the trial, the accused adopted a threatening and intimidating attitude and conducted themselves beyond the control of the presiding officer, and such threats were hurled openly in the court to the prosecution witnesses, investigators and members of the prosecution team with no action being taken by the presiding judge.

On the second day of the proceedings, the presiding judge issued a notice to the investigating officer requiring him to show cause within three days why a contempt of court action should not be taken against him.

The premise to issue such notice was that the investigating officer was found in a transitionary state. The investigating officer was and is, in fact, not the investigating officer in so far as the prosecution witness was being examined in the court. But he (the investigating officer) was assigned the investigation at a subsequent point of time having no direct involvement in terms of investigation when the prosecution witness was being examined.

The manner in which the evidence was being recorded, some vital aspects in the deposition narrated by the witness of the prosecution side were omitted, the AG said.

On the third day, threatening gestures were made to the AG by the two accused. The incident was reported to the presiding judge in the middle of the proceedings and was subsequently noted on the judicial record with no further action.

The above mentioned circumstances had rendered it impossible for the prosecution to conduct the case, the AG had contended. Owing to this development no proceedings could take place in the Central Prison on Tuesday.

Aslam Shaikh, brother of Adil Shaikh, said that Omar Shaikh had remarked that the prosecution’s tactics were aimed at preparing grounds for handing over the accused to the US.