MULTAN, Aug 7: Last of the prosecution witnesses in the Meerwala gang-rape case was on legs when the judge of the DG Khan anti-terrorism court adjourned the proceedings for next day.

Replying to defence queries on Wednesday, former Jatoi SHO, suspended inspector Nazir Babber (PW16) said he had remained unaware of the ‘Meerwala gang-rape incident’ till June 30 last when he came across with Mukhtaran Mai, her father Ghulam Fareed and others at the Jhugiwala Chowk when they were on way to the police station to lodge the FIR.

He said on June 22 last, the day of the incident, he had appear before a court in Jampur tehsil of the Rajanpur district and returned Jatoi police station at about 11pm. He claimed that though he had inquired about the events of the day from his sub-ordinates, none brought to his knowledge the matter of Abdul Shakoor (that he was in the police station at that time).

He said ASI Iqbal was not present at the police station at the time of his arrival from Jampur. He said though beat incharge of Meerwala area SI Imam Bakhsh had paid visit to the area as part of his anti-dacoity patrolling, even he did not bring to his (PW16) notice the matter.

He said the victim had herself pointed out names of the accused persons to him while recording her statement. He said when he read out to her the statement she had recorded, Mukhtaran Mai admitted it correct. She only pointed out that the father name of accused Ghulam Farid (juror-rapist) had been recorded incorrect as Mehmood instead of Allah Bakhsh.

He said, however, the objection raised by Mukhtaran Mai regarding the father’s name of accused Ghulam Farid was not recorded in ‘police karwai’ (case documentation). He said he did not disclose the names of the persons accused by the victim to the PWs.

The PW16 gave out that Muktharan Mai had revealed that Abdul Khaliq, the accused, was armed with pistol but he missed to record this fact. But, later on he duly recorded the fact in the police report. The cross-examination of the statement of PW16 was under way when judge Malik Zulfiqar Ali put off the proceedings till Thursday (today).

Earlier, Jatoi SDPO Muhammad Saeed Awan deposed his statement before court as PW15. He said he was appointed as the investigation officer of the Meerwala gang-rape case on July 3 by the Dera Range DIG. However, later on the investigation was handed over to Muzaffargarh City DSP Shaukat Murtaza Malhi.

Replying to defence queries, he also claimed that no body had informed him about the Meerwala incident till June 30, the day when the case was lodged by Mukhtaran Mai after eight days of the incident.

He said along with the gang-rape incident he had also come to know about the occurrence of sodomy with Shakoor on the same date of June 30. He said he had directed the SHO to register a case to this effect (sodomy) also. He said he admitted that the sodomy was a heinous crime which was cognizable and non-bailable offence. He said when he visited the Jatoi police station on July 1, the SHO had yet to register the sodomy case. He said he did not bring the matter of the non-compliance of his orders to the notice of his seniors.

He admitted that the address of accused Fayyaz Hussain (alleged rapists) was recorded by police as ‘resident of Meerwala’. He said he did not know that whether accused Fayyaz was a resident of Meerwala or Rampur. He denied that the complainant had raised voice through press that the police had arrested an innocent person for having the same name.

He said it was correct that the government and the apex court had given the police a deadline to arrest the accused in Meerwala case. But, he said, it was incorrect to suggest that to comply with the deadline police rounded up people having identical names with the accused persons.

It may be mentioned that at the start of the Meerwala gang-rape case hearing, the prosecution had announced a list of 27 witnesses. However, later on the prosecution on two different occasions requested court to drop some 11 PWs from the list of witnesses.

The judge gave up six PWs, including victim’s father, but the remaining five witnesses including Muzaffargarh district Nazim Sultan Hinjra could not be allowed to be dropped and instead their statements were recorded and cross-examined as court witnesses.

Meanwhile, defence lawyers — Malik Saleem, Yaqoob Khan and Yasir Khosa — had filed an application under Section 540 CrPC for the re-examination of area magistrate Rana Ashfaq who recorded statements of the complainants under section 164 CrPC. The judge will decide the matter on Thursday (today).

The ATC judge also issued bailable warrants of the Jatoi police station incharge, inspector Abdul Lateef Chandia, on Wednesday for his absence from court despite being directed to remain present during the proceedings.