MULTAN, July 30: The Dera Ghazi Khan anti-terrorism court recorded statements of seven witnesses in the Meerwala gang-rape case on Tuesday. Four of them were court witnesses (CWs) and three prosecution witnesses (PWs).
So far the court has recorded the statements of nine PWs and five CWs during the day-to-day trial of the case since July 26.
The prosecution had presented a list of 27 PWs. But on Monday last it requested the court to drop the names of eight of the PWs as ‘unnecessary’. But the court admitted the request partially as the judge directed Malik Sultan Hinjra, Muhammad Amjad, Abdul Wahid, Maulvi Faiz Muhammad and constable Abdul Majeed to appear as CWs.
Muzaffargarh Zila Nazim Sultan Hinjra (CW1) recorded his statement on Monday and was also cross-examined by the defence counsels. Muhammad Amjad (CW2), Abdul Wahid (CW3), Maulvi Faiz Muhammad (CW4) and Abdul Majeed (CW5) deposed on Tuesday.
They told the court that the Meerwala incident had spread terror and insecurity in the area to an extent that people had started thinking of migrating from there. However, to questions from the defence they could not give any example of migration from the area after the Meerwala case. The CW2, however, asserted that the area people were living under compulsion as the Punjab governor had assured them security.
The CW3 admitted that he was in full knowledge of the incident from the day of its occurrence—June 22 last — though he was not present at the site. He said he did not report the matter to the police because the aggrieved party did not ask him to do so. He said he visited Meerwala probably on June 23 or 24 last and met the father of the victim.
Muzaffargarh city DSP Shaukat Murtaza (PW8) informed the court that he was asked to investigate the case by the Dera Ghazi Khan range DIG on July 2 last. He said when the Punjab governor visited Meerwala on July 13 he had also gone there. To a defence counsel query, he said there was no need of presenting the accused before the governor as he had come to meet the victim’s family.
In his statement, Jatoi SHO Abdul Lateef Chandia said he prepared the challan of the case and that accused Muhammad Aslam, Allah Ditta, Khalil Ahmed, Ghulam Hussain, Hazoor Bakhsh, Rasool Bakhsh, Qasim Ali and Nazar Husain were placed in the column two of the challan for want of evidences against them.
He said main accused Abdul Khaliq was arrested on July 6 and during interrogation he helped recovery of the pistol on July 12 that he was carrying on the day of the incident. He admitted during the cross-examination that the witnesses at the time of pistol recovery were relatives of the complainants.
Earlier, area magistrate/civil judge of Alipur tehsil, Rana Muhammad Ashfaq (PW7), informed the court that he recorded statements of Mukhtaran Mai, her father Ghulam Farid, brother Abdul Shakoor, uncle Sabir Husain, Maulvi Abdul Razzaq and Ghulam Nabi under Section 164 CrPC on July 9 last.
In reply to defence cross-examination, he admitted that word “bazahir” (apparently) was inserted later on in the statement of Mukhtaran Mai where she cited the behaviour of Faiz Bakhsh Faiza (chief juror). He said this had to be done on the insistence of Mukhtaran Mai when he read out her statement recorded by him under Section 164 CrPC.
Defence counsel drew the attention of PW7 towards the contradictions in the statements of Mukhtaran Mai and Ghulam Nabi, whom she referred in her statement as eyewitness. But in his statement recorded under 164 CrPC, Ghulam Nabi said he was in Dera Ghazi Khan when the incident took place and that he returned to the area after two days of the incident.
Special public prosecutor Ramzan Khalid Joyya objected to the defence query that the contents of the documents could not be put to the witness. But the court ruled out his objection.
The PW7 said he recorded whatever the witnesses had said. They had declared their statements as correct when the same were read out to them, he said.
The court will resume its proceedings on Wednesday to hear Mukhtaran Mai, Ghulam Fareed, Abdul Shakoor, Maulvi Razzaq and Sabir Husain. The court has issued non-bailable warrants of Sabir Husain under Section 174 PPC for his continuous absence.