July 08, 2006	Saturday	Jumadi-ul-Sani 11, 1427

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window).

KOHAT, July 7: A couple, booked under the Hadood laws after their conversion to Islam sparked a controversy over their marital status, has appealed to the chief justice of the Supreme Court to take suo motu notice of their illegal imprisonment.

They said that the case registered against them was totally false and charges of adultery were baseless as their nikkah had been performed by a prayer leader in presence of witnesses.

Rehana Bibi, 23, who embraced Islam back in October 2003, was charged under sections 5/10/11 of the Hudood laws on the complaint of her Christian ex-husband, Azeem Masih, a sweeper in the army.

The jail superintendent had refused to allow an interview with her without “the prior permission of the judge concerned”. Later, when the judge concerned referred the application to the sessions judge, he allowed the couple to be interviewed after setting aside the ‘sub-judice’ clause, which bars reporting of under-trial cases. The couple was interviewed inside the court room.

Narrating her story, Rehana Bibi said: “I was married to Azeem against my wishes by my parents. After two months of my marriage, I accepted Islam and also offered my husband to convert. But he used to beat me up and tortured me and urged me to convert back to Christianity. I refused flatly.”

“I informed my parents about my husband’s attitude but they also sided with Azeem. Then, as a last resort I decided to marry a Muslim man and left home with Tanveer Masih who lived nearby our house and appeared inclined towards converting to Islam.”

“We were provided shelter by one Shahid in the Tappi area where a prayer leader performed our nikkah in January 2004 in the presence of two witnesses. Earlier, my husband, Tanveer, had also converted to Islam and his name was changed to Tanveer Ahmed.”

In the meantime, her family and in-laws kept pressing her to return to her husband and said that they would pardon her. But six months ago, when her baby, Abu Bakr, was born, police arrested her and Tanveer.

She said that they had been arrested because after the birth of her child her own family and in-laws believed that she would not return to her ex-husband. Earlier, they had hoped that she would realise her ‘fault’ and that her ex-husband would also accept her.

A burqa-clad Rehana said that she had married Tanveer after completing the 90-day Iddat period, compulsary under the Muslim law for remarriage.

“My ex-husband did not allow me to pray or recite Holy Quran. I had done nothing wrong,” she said with confidence and hoped: “God will help us.”

When she was asked why she embraced Islam, she wept and said: “I used to see girls offering prayers or reciting Holy Quran when I accompanied my mother to houses of Muslims where she worked as a maid. I pledged that when I turned adult I would embrace Islam; and I did.”

She appealed to the president and the chief justice of Pakistan to help them. The couple’s lawyer Nadir Khan said that he had obtained a decree from Muslim scholars who had termed both the accused innocent and their nikkah valid.

He explained that according to the Islamic rules, after her husband’s refusal to embrace Islam, she was free to take an independent decision about her life.

“I will approach the Shariat court to provide them justice if they are not freed by the lower court.”