In the Dua Zahra case, a Karachi court on Wednesday ordered the relevant authority to present Zaheer Ahmad’s phone call records from April 15 to April 19.
Zaheer was asked whether he was in Karachi or Lahore on April 15 during the hearing in the court of the judicial magistrate (East).
The young man accused of abducting and marrying Dua Zahra is named Zaheer. Parents of Dua Zahra reported her missing in the middle of April. Later, it was discovered that she had wed Zaheer Ahmed in Lahore.
The IO claimed that according to the call data record (CDR) for the number that was initially provided, Zaheer wasn’t in Karachi on April 15 and 16.
He stated that it is necessary to fetch the CDR for another phone number that was later provided.
The court then ordered the IO to present the CDR for the new number at the following hearing. In addition, it requested a further challan in the case, and the hearing was postponed until July 20.
Jibran Nasir, the attorney representing Mehdi Kazmi, the father of Dua Zahra, said during the hearing that the fresh investigation’s directives made the challan for classifying the case as class-C inadmissible.
He claimed that although the suspect was reachable by Karachi’s police, they did not detain him. Although he insisted Zahra was repeatedly forced to lie, he questioned “on whose insistence” the young girl did it.
Nasir questioned, adding that the accused kidnapper must appear in court and defend his case, “Who would be held accountable if the suspect in Zahra’s alleged kidnapping flees the country.”
The court questioned the government’s attorney, “How did you take the statement of a suspect who has not yet been arrested?”
In the meantime, the Sindh High Court (SHC) sent notices to the Sindh Home Department, Inspector General of Police of Sindh, Zaheer Ahmed, and others requesting their responses by July 21 regarding Kazmi’s new petition for the teenager’s return.
Kazmi entered a new plea yesterday, arguing that the girl was between the ages of 15 and 16 according to the medical board’s findings.
In the event that Zaheer is found guilty of “rape,” the petitioner demanded that he be punished. Since neither Sindh nor Punjab’s laws permit marriage before the age of 16, he claimed that Zaheer brought Zahra to Punjab to wed her and stated her age as 18 in the marriage contract to deem it valid.
In order to recover Zahra from Zaheer’s “illegal custody,” hand her over to her parents, and prevent Zaheer from taking the child outside of the country, Kazmi asked the court to issue an order.