Punished for speaking out of their Rights
 

Forty-five years old Allah Rakhi’s husband Amanat Masih died in 1996 leaving five children, three daughters and two sons behind. He also left a house in Radanwali village for the family. Allah Rakhi is a trained mid wife, after the death of her husband she managed to feed her family by practicing her skill. Before Amanat died he had a dispute with his Muslim neighbours Tariq, Nazar and Shahdu over the main passing way.

Allah Rakhi’s house is in the center the right and the left plots are occupied by Tariq and opposite houses are also owned by Tariq. In that lane except for two houses, one owned by Allah Rakhi and the other owned by a Muslim family the rest are owned by Tariq. The passage between the lane leads to the main road, which is the property of the government and is for the public to use it to come on the main road. Tariq wanted to make that passage part of his property. He built a wall blocking the passage. Tariq hold a bad reputation in the area because of his links with criminals and he is also involved in criminal activities. He used his influence and got the signatures of other inhabitants on a statement that they do not object to the making of a wall and also agreed to use the other way which passes through Tariq’s  house.

Allah Rakhi was the only one who opposed to this act and decided to agitate against it. She gave applications to local authorities against Tariq’s illegal seizuring of common passage. To terrorize her and to stop others from supporting her Tariq with his two friends Nazar and Shahdu broke into her house with fire arms on 8/8/99 at about mid night. Allah Rakhi was sleeping on the roof while her children were downstairs. The three assailants first physically tortured the family and then Nazar raped Allah Rakhi infront of her children, while Tariq and Shahdu stood pointing weapons at the children.   Before leaving Tariq threatened Allah Rakhi that if she continued to speak against him he will do the same to her daughters.

The next day Allah Rakhi managed to go to the police station to report the incident but police refused to register the case.  One of her relative Azam took her to Lahore  to meet his Muslim friend, who was the secretary to the Governor, when he heard her story he contacted the concerned police officer. On his intervention police registered the case First Information Report no: 187/99 under section 10 7/79 Hudood Ordinance, but tampered the facts stated by Allah Rakhi, which made the case  weak against the accused.

When Tariq came to know that Allah Rakhi has managed to register a case against him. He bribed the police and filed false cases against Allah Rakhi her daughter, and her two sons.

The police instead of taking action against Tariq and others, arrested Allah Rakhi her daughter and her sons in the false cases filed by Tariq . Allah Rakhi and her daughter got their interim bails while Robert and Francis (Allah Rakhi’s sons) were sent to judicial lock up.

Police started pressurizing her to with draw her case. Against Tariq and others. Due to lack of funds she was unable to engage a lawyer for her sons.  Through a local pastor she came to CLAAS on 27/8/99 for legal assistance.

Through CLAAS  bail application for Robert and Francis was filed with the Civil Judge First Class/Judicial Magistrate section 30 rejected their bail on 25/09/99. Another bail was filed in the Court of Additional Session Judge Javed Meer, the court  granted the bail.

Another writ petition No: 15990/99  was filed in the High Court on 29/08/99 requesting the court to order to Assistant Superintendent of Police - Sangla Hill to record supplementary statement of Allah Rakhi and to arrest the accused and take strict action against the nominated accused in accordance with the law.  On 30-08-99  the High Court  gave orders to Assistant Superintendent of Police to record Allah Rakhi’s statement, which has still not been recorded.

CLAAS has filed another writ petition No:1268/W/99 on16-10-99 against Superintendent of Police - Sangla Hill for Contempt of Court, the court has ordered the SP to present before the court but no date has been fixed by the court for hearing.