DERA GHAZI KHAN, Aug 6: Mukhtaran Mai, the Meerwala gang-rape victim, burst into tears on Tuesday while responding to the ‘crooked’ questioning by the defence counsel at the local anti-terrorism court.

When the judge put on record the weeping incident, the defence counsel objected that court had no concern either with sympathy or morality and the word ‘weeping’ depicted prejudiced mind of the judge.

The judge observed neither his inner views nor his mind was disclosed as only the fact had been noted.

It was the second day to the cross-examination of the victim by the defence which even inquired about the minute details from her. She was even asked whether her ‘shalwar’ (trouser) was on her legs when she was being raped.

Replying to defence queries, she said it was incorrect to suggest she was not dragged by her perpetrators while taking her to the house of accused Abdul Khaliq from the place where the Panchayat was convened. Only her feet were touching the ground when her tormentors were dragging her, she said and added that she was not wearing bangles at that time.

She said her shoes had fallen behind when her perpetrators were dragging her to the room. She said the shoes were collected by her uncle Sabir Hussain and he handed these over to her when her father Ghulam Farid put on clothes to her after the ‘ziadti’ (rape). Her tormentors, she said, threw her naked out of the room after committing the gang-rape.

She said she could not resist because she had been overpowered by the perpetrators. She said they (the tormentors) did not close the door of the room where ‘ziadti’ was committed. She said she was taken back to her home after the ‘ziadti’ by her relatives.

She said she and her family did not discuss whether the case should be registered with the police because they were not in their senses. She said when she came into her senses even then she did not sit with her family members for several days to persuade them to lodge the case or contact Maulvi Razzaq and Manzoor Hussain (PWs) to discuss with them the issue.

She said government authorities like the Punjab governor, federal and provincial ministers and other dignitaries had come to meet her after the registration of the case. She denied that she had received hundreds of thousands of rupees from the government and NGOs saying “I have not got even a rupee from anybody”.

Mukhtaran Mai said federal minister Dr Attiya Inayatullah stated to her that Gen Musharraf had sent her a cheque of Rs0.5m. But, she said she had returned the cheque to the minister with an advice to spend it on the construction of a school.

When the defence grilled her that she had washed her clothes which she was wearing on June 22 last (the day of incident) to make an excuse because they were not smeared, she said she did not comprehend that the clothes should not be washed.

She said her family questioned from Shakoor, her brother, when he returned from the police station that whether he had committed ‘ziadti’ with Salma but he denied such an occurrence and instead revealed that Jamil, Pannu and Manzoor had committed sodomy with him.

She said she had given out to the police that the Mastois had also committed sodomy with her brother, but the ‘thanedar’ said this issue would be taken up at a later stage.

She said that she had married some 10 years ago and after three years of uncordial relations with her husband, Umerwadda, divorce was agreed. She denied that her husband had divorced her for she was caught red-handed in an objectionable condition with her husband’s cousin Faizullah. She said Faizullah was the cousin of her father also.

She said she had refused several proposals (of marriage) after her divorce because she did not like to be remarried and added “marriage is solemised only once in the life”.

She said her elders did not ask about her will while proposing ‘exchange marriages’ to the Mastois. She said she might have agreed to marry accused Abdul Khaliq as part of the settlement to sacrifice not only for her brother but for the whole family (at this point she burst into tears). She denied that her ‘sharee nikah’ was performed with accused Abdul Khaliq.

At this, the defence counsel announced that they had completed the cross-examination of the victim’s statement which she deposed before court on Saturday last. The judge adjourned the proceedings for Wednesday (today).

The judge also summoned Jatoi SDPO Saeed Awan and its former SHO Nazir Babber, prosecution witnesses, to record their statements on Wednesday (today).