KARACHI, May 1: A rape victim has pleaded to the Federal Shariat Court at Karachi to enhance the punishment of the convict, who was her family doctor.
The petitioner, represented by Javed Iqbal Burqi, has filed the constitutional revision petition under Article 203 DD(2).
The counsel has maintained that the victim was aggrieved and prejudiced by the judgement passed by the Court of Vth ADJ, Hyderabad, Judge Abdul Rehman Bhatti, in Session Case No 150/2000, under Section 10(3) Zina Bil Jabar, liable to Tazeer Enforcement of Hudood Ordinance, 1979, in which the respondent/convict was awarded only a five-year term and Rs50,000 fine for further payment to the victim. In case of non-payment, he was to undergo one more year of sentence.
According to facts of the case, the petitioner/victim appeared at the police station on Sept 22, 1999, and reported that on Aug 5, she was not feeling well. Therefore, her brother’s wife called Dr Waseem Ansari, a family doctor who came at 2030 hours and after brief observation, asked for arranging hot water. When the victim’s sister-in-law went to the kitchen, Dr Waseem Ansari locked the door of the room and committed Zina with the petitioner/victim by force and ran away. When her sister-in-law heard her cries, she rushed inside the room as the door was ajar and saw that the petitioner in a precarious condition.
The incident was then brought to the knowledge of Dr Waseem Ansari’s family. The convict’s brother, Mujeeb Ansari, promised for solution of the problem but in vain.
Hence, a criminal case was registered and on conclusion of the investigation, a Challan was submitted.
It is the case of the petitioner that after complete adjudication, the ADJ Vth Hyderabad judge raised two points for determination. In the first point, the court, in its findings, determined and declared that Dr Waseem Ansari had committed Zina Bil Jabar with his patient in the house of the victim. The court convicted Dr Waseem Ansari under Section 10(3) for offence of Zina liable to Tazeer Enforcement of Hudood Ordinance 1979.
The punishment of Zina Bil Jabar liable to Hudd is stoning- till-death in case four prudent witnesses appear before the court of law and record a statement that they have seen the act of Zina.
In Section 7 of the Zina Hudood Ordinance EHO, the punishment for the person who commits Zina or Zina Bil Jabar is five years and fine if the accused is not an adult.
In Section 10(3) Zina Or Zina Bil Jabar liable to Tazeer, the punishment may be extended to 25 years.
In this particular case, the court of ADJ Vth, in para 15, had stated that the court was of the opinion that the accused, Dr Waseem Ansari, was guilty of the offence of Zina Bil Jabar liable to Tazeer punishable under Section 10(3) EHO 1979.
It was the contention of the victim that when Zina Bil Jabar was proved, then the maximum punishment must be given and there should be no mercy for such a person who had adopted such a noble profession.
It was her case that the convict must be put behind bars for a longer period, so that he may not be able to destroy the life of any other innocent patient in the future.
The convict tried to get the benefit of lodging FIR after 47 days of the incident. It was the contention of the victim that no time limit could be prescribed by the High Court under the concept of Section 154 Cr.P.C. for the appearance of the complainant and making of his/her statement before the police functionaries, because limitation was totally foreign to the doctrine of initiation of criminal proceedings.
The most important piece of evidence in Zina cases was that of the victim. Secondly, the evidence of the medical officer who had examined the victim.
It was therefore prayed to the court that after considering the facts and grounds mentioned above, to enhance the punishment of the respondent/convict.
The petitioner has also prayed for calling R&P of this case from the Vth ADJ, Hyderabad, Session Case No 150/2000.