Justice Nasirul Mulk has written a dissenting note in the Mukhtaran Mai gang rape case and rejected the Lahore High Court’s decision.“I have had the benefit of reading the lucid judgement authored by Justice Mian Saqib Nisar and concurred by Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan, upholding the final conclusions drawn by the high court in the impugned judgement and its findings on various questions raised before it. While agreeing with some of the findings in the proposed judgement, with humility and utmost respect, I have formed a different opinion on other aspects of the case,” Mulk said in the note.“For the foregoing reasons, criminal appeal no 171 of 2005, filed by Abdul Khaliq, is dismissed, criminal appeal numbers 163 to 166 of 2005, filed by the state and 167 to 170 of 2005, filed by Mukhtaran Mai are partially allowed. The impugned judgement to the extent of acquittal of Allah Ditta, Ghulam Fareed, Faiz Mastoi and Muhammad Ramzan Pachar, is set aside and they are convicted under Section 10(3) of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 read with Section 19 of the ordinance and Section 109 PPC for abetment of zina-bil-jabr and under Section 7(c) of the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997, and on each count sentenced to imprisonment for ten years. The sentences shall run concurrently,” the judge observed in his note.“In any society, much less rural or tribal, would brothers falsely scandalise their unmarried sister to save their own skin from a criminal charge of sodomy. The facts of the present case show that the accused party did not need any protection as according to the testimony of Abdul Shakoor, because of fear and shame he had refrained from reporting the sodomy to the police. Considering the complainant being a weaker party the accused did not had to worry about any criminal charge of sodomy,” he further said. He also observed, “Taking up first the question of delay in lodging the report. Admittedly, it was made after eight days of the incident. There are no hard and fast rules for assessing the effect on the prosecution case of delay in reporting the crime to the police. Every case is to be examined on its own facts and the nature of the crime committed. The courts are generally inclined not to attach much importance to delay in reporting rape, considering that the victim and her family would take time to recover from shock and to be in a position to decide.”
Mukhtar Mai case, A judge Nasir-ul-Mulk wrote dissention note
