SHC bars police from Aamir Liaquat’s exhumation

Lawyer argues earlier judgement hasty, autopsy will be desecration of grave

The Sindh High Court (SHC) has suspended an earlier order by the judicial magistrate regarding member of National Assembly (MNA) Dr. Aamir Liaquat Hussain’s exhumation and subsequent autopsy.

The body of Dr. Aamir was to be exhumed on Thursday. The court also issued notices to the health secretary and the medical board formed for the purpose.

A two-member bench, headed by Justice Mohammad Junaid Ghaffar, heard the petition seeking a stay order on the post-mortem of the late TV host and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf MNA.

The lawmaker’s daughter, son and their lawyer, Zia Awan, appeared in court as the latter argued against Judicial Magistrate East Wazir Hussain Memon’s verdict.

Justice Junaid  Ghaffar questioned what was wrong with Memon’s verdict. The counsel contended that the person who applied for the autopsy was not a relative of the deceased.

“Anyone can come like this tomorrow. The purpose of the applicant seeking Aamir Liaquat’s autopsy was to get cheap fame,” he stated.

Citing the example of the late Pakistan People’s Party leader, Benazir Bhutto, he added that “an autopsy was also not carried out after the denial by ex-prime minister Benazir Bhutto’s heirs.

The assassination of Benazir Bhutto was also a high-profile case, the lawyer contended.

The lawyer added that an autopsy was prohibited according to the Sharia and presented a fatwa to support his argument.

“Autopsy of Aamir Liaquat will desecrate his grave,” he pleaded.

Calling the earlier judgment a “hasty” decision, he urged the court to “quash” it.

In response to this, the court inquired if the lawyer had been granted an opportunity to plead his case before the magistrate, to which he responded in the affirmative but expressed dissatisfaction in the process.

“No fan has the right to appeal for an autopsy. If that happens then it will set a bad example,” he further argued.

The court then directed Awan to read the written judgment of the magistrate and after the advocate complied, the court suspended the earlier order.

The hearing was adjourned till June 29 and notices were issued to the concerned parties.