KARACHI: His biggest accused in the Mustafa Amir murder case was sent to jail on Saturday when he refused to record the statement of his confession, while a magistrate observed that the suspect was not in a stable condition to record his confession.
The administrative judge of the Anti -Terrorism Courts sent Irmagan to jail on judicial remand because he said that it was necessary to send a suspect to judicial custody, whether he refuses to admit or refuses to be confessed to the magistrate.
Araghan has been booked at the Defense Housing Authority for allegedly abducting and killing 23 -year -old Mustafa Amir and touching his body with a car in January.
Investigation Officer, Inspector Muhammad Ali, filed a petition before the magistrate, which filed a petition to record the statement of the accused’s confession under Section 164 of the Criminal Code of Conduct and brought it to the court.
The court rejected the IO’s request to record the court’s confessional statement in the Mustafa Amir murder case
Judicial Magistrate (South), Asim Aslam, in his order, stated that after removing the handcuffs, the suspect was made to sit in his chamber and the police officers were instructed to leave the premises and give him an hour to reflect an hour.
It also states that the suspect looks tired and slow, and the magistrate informed him that he is not obliged to make a confession because he can be used against him as proof.
Initially, the suspect said he wanted to confess his crime and killed Mustafa Aamir because of the previous conflict, but did not kill him with any plan, but it suddenly broke out.
However, it also said that when the suspect was told that he would be sent to jail, whether he commits a confession or not, he refused to record his confession and emphasized that he was being prepared by the “Jewish Mafia and the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad”.
The suspect claimed that the intelligence agency had been in a long time and that the complainant of the case was also part of such a mafia.
The order added, “Then once again the accused said that he did not kill Mustafa Aamir but left him in the car and burned it only in front of the car. He left Allah to decide Mustafa Amir’s fate. Further, the accused said that the political parties of our country are part of the Jewish mafia and they are part of the Jewish mafia.”
In view of the aforementioned reasons, the magistrate was of the opinion that the suspect was not in a stable condition to record his confession and then, he was rejecting the application filed by IO to record the confession.
The magistrate also said that the law had forced the court to send the suspect to jail, but he did not have the authority to decide the custody of the suspect as he was in custody by the ATC’s administrative judge and directed the IO to immediately prepare the suspect before the relevant court.
Subsequently, the suspect was brought before the ATC Karachi’s administrative judge, who sent him to jail on a judicial remand.
The judge said that the police had also prepared a Medico legal certificate of the suspect.
It can be remembered that Syed Shiraz Hussain Bukhari, another suspected and alleged colleague of Irmaghn, was jailed on March 3 in a similar manner, when he also refused to record his confessional statement before the magistrate.
At the previous hearing, the ATC was told that the central suspect, Armaghan, who has been in police custody since February 18, and has already recorded his “confession” before a senior superintendent of police under Section 21-H of the Anti-Terrorism Act (Conditional Acceptance of confession).
According to the relevant clause, “the law, in 1984, in 1984, or anything in any other law for the present, where any court proceedings under this act (including the circumstances and other evidences in any correct action, it is speculated that there is a reasonable possibility that any reason is a reasonable possibility that any reason is a reasonable possibility. By any confession, by any confession, by any confession, through any confession, during any confession, through any confession, during any confession, any confession has committed the crime.
It was also provided that before the police officer recorded such a confession, he explained to the person that he made it clear that he was not obliged to admit and that if he did so, it could be used as evidence against him and unless the police officer found that he was made voluntarily.
Dawn, appeared on March 23, 2025
