DERA GHAZI KHAN, Aug 5: The defence in the Meerwala gang-rape cross-examined the victim on Monday at the DG Khan anti-terrorism court. The counsel were on their legs when the judge announced adjournment.

Mukhtaran Mai, the victim, had recorded her brief statement with the court on Saturday.

Replying to defence counsel, she said that she did not say to the police that arbitrators of both sides had unanimously decided to settle the matter between her Gujjar family and the Mastois through ‘exchange marriages’.

She said she told the police that arbitrators from her side (Gujjars) had proposed ‘exchange marriages’. She denied telling police that it was the ‘akath’ (gathering) representing both sides.

She said in fact it was the ‘akath’ of Mastois where the arbitrators from her (Gujjar) side had gone to propose the ‘exchange marriages’. Here defence counsel Malik Muhammad Saleem urged court to take on record the word ‘akath’. The judge, Malik Zulfiqar Ali, observed that the FIR was the basis of the case and that importance of each sentence would be discussed clearly.

The defence counsel argued that the FIR was not a substantive piece of evidence and had no evidentiary value in itself except confrontations, contradictions and omissions.

Mukhtaran Mai maintained that Abdul Khaliq, Ramzan Pachaar and Ghulam Farid had cast away the proposal of ‘exchange marriages’ and demanded ‘a rape for a rape’. She said she did not tell the police that the rest of ‘akath’s participants had opposed the demand of ‘a rape for a rape’. She said there was no truth in it that she did not mention before the area magistrate (while recording her statement under section 164 of CrPC) the ‘siasi’ (political) and ‘duniavi’ (ostentatious) attitude of Faiz Muhammad (the chief juror).

Mukhtaran said she informed the police that Ramzan Pachaar (arbitrator), Faiz Mastoi and her uncle Sabir Hussain had brought her brother Shakoor back from the police station.

She said her brother Shakoor was 11 or 12-year-old while her one sister was one-and-a-half-year older than him (Shakoor) and the remaining two were younger than him. She said on June 22 afternoon, hues of Shakoor had emanated from the house of Abdul Khaliq. At this, she along with her mother and other womenfolk of her family rushed out. In the street, they came across five or six Mastois who alleged they had caught Shakoor red-handed committing ‘ziadti’ (rape) with Salma.

Mukhtaran Mai said later on she and her mother had brought ‘Quran Pak’ from their house and proceeded to the house of Abdul Khaliq. She said Khaliq along with 15/20 people was present outside his house. She said they begged mercy for Shakoor for the sake of the holy book but instead Khaliq and others hurled abuses and threats at them. She said Khaliq and others did not try to either drag or take her to his house when she and her mother were begging for Shakoor.

She said she had not asked Khaliq and others to let them meet Shakoor to ascertain veracity of the allegation. She said, however, when they called their men she asked her uncle Sabir to inquire from Shakoor that whether he had committed ‘ziadti’. But, the uncle told her that the police had taken Shakoor to the police station. At this, her mother insisted for the release of Shakoor, but, the uncle said he was trying to first settle the matter with the Mastois. At this point, the judge put off the proceedings for Tuesday (today).

Earlier, the defence counsel raised the issue of whether Fayyaz Hussain (alleged rapist) was the actual accused the complainant had alleged for the crime. The defence counsel told court that the complainant family had reportedly told the Punjab governor during his visit to Meerwala on July 13 last that the police had arrested an innocent (Fayyaz Hussain) instead of the actual accused who was the first cousin of accused Abdul Khaliq. But Mukhtaran Mai refuted that neither she nor any of her family member had ever complained to the governor or to the press on this account.

The judge had summoned Jatoi SDPO Saeed Awan and its former SHO Nazeer Baber to appear before court on Tuesday (today). The two police officials are on the list of prosecution witnesses.

The judge did not give his verdict even on Monday on the application of prosecution lawyers to drop Ghulam Farid (victim’s father), Ghulam Nabi and Haji Manzoor from the list of the PWs. The prosecution had filed the application on Friday last.