Low Graphics Site
 
 
|
|
|
|
January 14, 2009
|
Wednesday
|
Muharram 16, 1430
|
HYDERABAD: Court issues notices to DPO, SHO on couple’s petition
By Our Staff Correspondent
HYDERABAD, Jan 13: The Sindh High Court’s Hyderabad circuit bench on Tuesday issued notices to Badin DPO, Golarchi SHO and two private persons to appear in court on Jan 27 on a petition filed by a couple who claimed a jirga had declared them karo-kari for marrying of their own free will.
Ms Rajjo and her husband Abdul Razzak Chang said in their petition that Ms Rajjo had filed an affidavit before a magistrate on Jan 5, stating that her parents wanted to marry her off to a complete stranger against her will but it was not acceptable to her.
The petitioners said that after filing the affidavit, she married Abdul Razzak the same day and got their nikkah registered in Lyari, Karachi. Ms Rajjo lived in Garari village near Golarchi before marriage.
They said that after publication of a public notice about their marriage the girl’s father Soomar and brothers who believed in outdated customs and traditions and wanted to sell their girls for money pressurised Razzak’s parents to return Ms Rajjo or face consequences.
They said Razzak’s relatives were threatened that they would be implicated in heinous crimes but they refused to bow to them. After their refusal Ms Rajjo’s relatives held a jirga which declared them as karo-kari and hired criminals to kill them, they said.
They said that at the instigation of Ms Rajjo’s relatives the Golarchi SHO was misusing his official position by harassing and pressurising RAzzak’s relatives.
Police had arrested Razzak’s brother Ramzan and relatives Hanif, Hashim and others and kept them in wrongful confinement to pressurise them to produce the couple or face cases, they said.
They said that after jirga’s decision and threats by Ms Rajjo’s relatives, they had been hiding in different places to save their lives. Ms Rajjo had done no wrong but exercised her right of marriage of her own free will, they said.
They requested the court to direct the DPO to provide them protection and take preventive action by taking legal action against Ms Rajjo’s relatives.
|
