Daily Times

MANSEHRA: The family of the minor boy who was sexually assaulted by his madrassa’s tutor claimed on Sunday that JUI-F leader Mufti Kifayatullah is threatening them to settle the issue outside out of the court.

The clear-cut development comes on the edge of the case, when the DNA test proved that the cleric Shamsudin has sexually assaulted the minor boy. Consequently, in the meantime, the police officials also declared to include all those under the relevant laws, who then had harbored the suspect.

It is to mention, the wrongdoer Shamsudin had remained absconder for three days, then brought before the local magistrate by putting some reservations, accompanied by Mufti Kifayatullah and other JUI-F members.

“JUI-F leader Mufti Kifayatullah and his aides threatened us with dire consequences if the assault case wasn’t settled out of court and even they offered money for the purpose, but we didn’t give in.” Muhammad Iqbal, the uncle of the assault victim briefed the media.

Be that as it may, this was not the first time, on December 31 last year, the victim’s family without disclosing any person had told in a joint press conference that some members from JUI-F are threatening them to withdraw from the case.

In the meanwhile, the adviser to the Chief Minister (CM) Punjab on population welfare Ahmad Hussain Shah met the minor family and present Rs100, 000cheque on the behalf of the CM.

He also said that the government would provide education to the minor.

Mr Shah also pledged to take strict action against the offender. Whereas the government is closely working to implement a strict bill against the pedophiles. He added.

The family of the assaulted minor pleaded to hang the culprit Shamsudin before the public, by quoting that this the only way to save other’s children.

On the other hand, the JUIF suspended leader Mufti Kifayyatullah said on Monday (today)that he has extracted himself from the offender, by saying that after the DNA test, there left no room to stand with a wrongdoer.

It might make reference here, that before the DNA test verdict, some close individuals of the offender, had trapped a minor boy as the actual one who did the wrong. Although before the magistrate the minor boy had cleared his position.