The Supreme Court acquitted a man who was imprisoned for 12 years for accusations of violating his daughter, citing contradictions in the prosecution’s evidence.
In a court order of August 26, seen by Dawn.comJudge Ali Baqar Najafi said that the evidence of the Prosecutor’s Office was discarded, and pointed out that it was “poor reliability.”
“The prayer and condemnation of the appellant were annulled. It is released immediately if it is not necessary in any other case,” said the order.
In 2010, the youngest daughter of the suspect informed her mother and maternal uncle that “her own father had committed violation with her,” according to the order.
He declared that on October 2, 2010, the victim, of six or seven years, went to his mother crying and revealed that his father, the appellant, had committed an “incorrect act” with her, after which he felt severe pain.
Subsequently, the father was arrested and sentenced to life imprisonment under section 376 (1) of the Pakistan Criminal Code and a fine of RS35,000. The sentence was confirmed by the Superior Court of Lahore in 2013.
The suspect had approached the SC against the decision of the LHC. The case was heard today by a bank of three members.
The order pointed out that the mother’s case was that the daughter was “subject to rape by the appellant at 2:00 pm”, but the victim’s statement “creates doubts about her credibility and, therefore, requires a strong corroboration.”
He also said: “According to the plaintiff (mother), the victim was taken to the hospital where she was examined in her presence.
“However, the doctor’s opinion is self -contracting, since in his chief examination he declared that the victim was subjected to rape, but in the interrogation he categorically declared that, based on the report of the chemical examiner, it was not found that he has not committed to rape.”
Judge Najafi declared: “This leaves the court a serious question about the credibility of the victim’s statement and the possibility of a false involvement of the appellant. Why the accusations were added against the appellant, it may be due to the fact that there was a dispute between the complainant and the appellant …”
The judge also mentioned that the Court of First Instance did not put the victim’s rationality proof before registering his statement, declaring: “… a child is a competent witness if a sufficient expiration standard of understanding passes on the facts that were going to be narrated.”
“A note/observation of the court, based on the relevant questions and their answers would make such a statement,” said the order, pointing out that the victim’s statement “needs a strong corroboration.”
Despite the presence of laws against violation, with punishment for violation, whether it results in the death penalty or imprisonment between 10 and 25 years, cases continue to prevail in the country.
Last year, the data collected by Sahil, an NGO that works in cases of child sexual abuse, revealed that the overwhelming majority of abusers are known or neighbors in communities or family members.
In March, four suspects who raped and killed an 11 -year -old girl in Bahawalpur were tracked as relatives of the victim, and two of them were maternal uncles.
