A sessions court has sentenced a man to 10-year imprisonment in a rape case. Zeeshan, alias Shani, was found guilty of assaulting a teenage girl within the jurisdiction of the Rizvia Society police station in June 2024.
Additional Sessions Judge (Central) Mirza Tauseef Ahmed ruled: “In view of the confidence-inspiring testimony of the victim, corroboration by the complainant, medical evidence, and the highly conclusive DNA report, the prosecution has proved its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt.” The court sentenced the accused to 10-year imprisonment for the offence of rape punishable under the Section 376 of the Pakistan Penal Code and ordered him to pay a Rs100,000 fine or undergo an additional two-year imprisonment on default.
The judge observed that the fine amount shall be paid to the victim as “compensation for the anguish and psychological damage caused to her.”
About the quantum of the sentence, the judge said the maximum punishment for the offence of rape was death penalty, or imprisonment of not less than 10 years and up to 25 years, and the offender shall also be liable to fine. “However, since the convict is a first offender, having no previous criminal record and is young man of aged 22 years, who needs to be integrated in the society after serving out his sentence, he deserves leniency in sentencing,” he added.
According to state prosecutor Hina Naz Shams, the girl’s father lodged an FIR, stating that the accused was the brother of his tenant living on the first floor of the building in Sarhad Ittehad Colony, Golimar, and he forcibly raped his 18-year-old daughter on June 8, 2024.
He said the accused had also subjected her to sexual abuse two to three times before. The prosecutor stated that the accused, being brother of the tenant, used to visit the complainant’s house, adding that he had threatened the victim with dire consequences if she disclosed her ordeal to anyone.
She said the girl disclosed the incident to her elder sister, who later informed their father, leading to the registration of the FIR. She said the complainant and victim fully supported the prosecution case as medical and DNA reports corroborated the charge, requesting the judge to punish the accused as per the law.
On the other hand, the defence lawyer contended that the accused had been falsely implicated in the case. He said the accused voluntarily surrendered for fair investigation but was falsely charge-sheeted. He said there were contradictions in the witnesses’ statements and the FIR was lodged after a delay of four days.
