LAHORE The question of immunity to Raymond Davis before the court may not have hurried his release as it has been done through diyat which, however, is not without suspicions and doubts in view of the public and the jurists. The Lahore High Court in its detailed judgment has rightly explained that no one appeared before it leading the immunity question but expressing apprehensions that the government was about to extend this benefit to the murderer of two citizens which the court can stop. Chief Justice Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry while proceeding with four petitions had repeatedly observed that before the court no one raised the question of immunity to the US killer. However, petitioners challenged the matter from various angles: name of the killer may be put on the ECL, government may be refrained from meddling with the record of foreign ministry and investigations of the case, restricting his shifting to the Lahore Fort, and not releasing him on the basis of diplomatic immunity. However, none had directly challenged that immunity was not available to Davis and the same may be denied. The CJ also wondered why not anyone had come to claim or otherwise immunity for Raymond. For the reason the detailed decision stated the court was not supposed to deal with a point which was not placed before it. However, it is pertinent to mention that the court did call for a reply from the foreign ministry to the petitions which were presented on March 14 last without touching the point of immunity on the basis that the matter was sub judice and that the court of law have to decide the same. On the other hand it was US President Barrack Obama, the American Embassy, the Lahore Consulate and Raymond himself, who repeatedly agitated the diplomatic immunity against prosecution over the double murder in terms of Vienna Convention of 1961 and wanted release with immediate effect on that score. While the government of Pakistan and top functionaries took a consistent stand that the matter was before the court hence it has to decide the same. The court, however, has to decide the case in light of the prosecution investigations, its findings, arguments and pleadings. But the prosecution did not expand the scope of trial or proceedings where issue might have gone up step after step at the judicial level. So the matter was kept at a very low and narrow scale to end it up at payment of diyat and seeking pardon from the legal heirs. In case the immunity had been associated with the case as an issue, it could have become lengthy and complicated and also vulnerable to attract other allied issues like gadgets recovered from the possession of Raymond, his fake identity, purpose of visit to the remote places in city, mobile sims and the contacts he had with the banned organisations, sophisticated weapons with him, his travelling in a private car, his arrival on business visa and others. If immunity had been certified in favour of the killer by the foreign ministry such questions would have arisen that whether a diplomat was permitted to do all this under the international law, say jurists. Raymond had killed two young men in public creating a terror but not efforts were made to insert ATA in the case. The case would have been in a different character had that ATA sections been attracted to his case. At the level of the LHC, expectations were high that Foreign Ministry would say something on certifying or otherwise on immunity question but nothing came up before it. The Punjab Government had in writing informed the court that it was waiting for the reply from Federal Government on this count as it was its prerogative in terms of section 4 of the Diplomatic and Consular Privileges Act of 1972 but the Federal Government did not furnish to any to enable it tell the court on this score. Since certification had to be done by the Foreign Ministry which it did not, the court at any level could not go into that area despite the fact, Raymond had claimed this relief before the Trial Court. This shows the scope of the case was kept within limits, which benefited the accused for its expeditious release. Another aspect of the matter is the unusual and shocking quickness about winding up the case at the trial court level where the prosecution and the complainant party presented a ready-made case for acquittal of the accused without insisting on going deep into it. For the determination of the legal heirs, there is a procedure wherein the identity of the heirs is established through advertisement and evidence and so far not evidence is available that this course was adopted. The case was also not found worth judging on section 311Cr PC or that it was that of a fisadfil arz. The court was also kept in the dark about the statement made by Shumaila, the widow of Fahim, on the death bed that she would not pardon the blood of her husband. Now the most important and worrying aspect of the matter is mysterious disappearance of the families of the deceased Fahim and Faizan after they last appeared before the Trial Court on March 16. If they have pardoned the killer with fair heart, without pressure and with their free will against the receipt of diyat, why they are hiding that too, so secretly that no one knows about any of the 18 of them. Up to Raymond, the case has ended for no one can dare bring him back from America if any lacuna mars his acquittal. However, appearance and statement of the victim families may answer the said questions which strike minds of the people who still strongly believe that Raymond was a CIA agent and master mind of terror hits in the country.