Mukhtar Mai

In his final arguments, special public prosecutor Ramzan Khalid Joiya demanded exemplary punishment for the 14 accused while declaring them guilty of a 'planned' gang-rape.

Replying to the arguments of the defence counsel, Mr Joiya admitted that two real brothers could not commit 'zina' (rape) in each other's presence if it was a matter of compromise. When it came to revenge, he said even a father and son could commit 'zina' together.

"Wasn't it astonishing that accused Abdul Khaliq met the shock of his life after seeing Shakoor in an objectionable condition with his sister Salma in the afternoon and at night the same day he (Khaliq) had garlanded himself as a groom," said the prosecutor.

He expressed surprise that the accused again locked Shakoor and Salma in a room. He pleaded, in fact, the accused staged a drama to cover up the sodomy committed to Shakoor by his (Khaliq's) brother Punnu and his accomplices Manzoor and Jamil.

On substitution of Fayyaz, he said this accused was arrested in the second week of July last and the challan was submitted in the case of July 18. But, he said none of his relatives had during this period pointed out that he had been arrested instead of the actual culprit. The same was the situation with accused Ghulam Farid, he added.

He asked why didn't the defence got them identified from any of the prosecution witnesses, including the victim, despite having doubts over their identity.

The prosecutor said Mukhtaran Mai had identified them as among her tormentors. He said accused Khaliq in his statement at first instance said he only took the girl (the victim) away from the Panchayat but did not mention any 'nikkah' with Mukhtaran Mai. He argued that the 'nikkah' story was a 'concocted statement' of the defence.

Concluding his remarks, Mr Joiya argued that it was the theory of law that time, place and mode were important regarding the occurrence of a crime. He said the defence had admitted facts about time and place as described by the prosecution.

He also pleaded that the defence in its final arguments had tried to confront PW11, PW13 and PW14 with their alleged statements given to the Dera Ghazi Khan Range SP (crime) Mirza Abbas, whom the defence had first called as its witness and then declared him 'hostile'. The prosecutor asked what moral and legal authority was left with the defence that it mainly relied on the file of an official against whom it expressed distrust in the court.

He said the SP crime was entrusted with a task to probe only inefficiency, irregularities and corruption among the Jatoi police ranks and that he had nothing to do with the case under trial at the court. He pointed out that the SP's inquiry had no mention of the police malpractices.

Earlier, the defence completed its arguments before the court. On the third-day running, defence counsel Malik Muhammad Saleem said on June 22 last only the complainants (Gujjar family) were anxious to strike a compromise with the Mastois because Shakoor had been taken by the police after he was caught red-handed with Salma while committing 'zina'.

He said, therefore, the complainants agreed to the demand of Abdul Khaliq for his instant 'nikkah' with Mukhtaran Mai as a patch-up for the release of Shakoor from the police custody. Otherwise, he said it was unnatural to assume that Sabir went to the police station along with Abdul Khaliq to get released Shakoor, though, a short while ago four persons including Khaliq had gang-raped his (Sabir's) niece.

Concluding his arguments, the defence counsel reiterated man-made laws were no match for Allah's divine law which called for testimony of four eye-witnesses to award punishment to the accused in a rape case.

He alleged the Meerwala incident was the outcome of the 'villainy' of Maulvi Abdul Razzaq (PW11) and a conspiracy against Islam.

[ brief ] [ original story ]