the edict says imrana should not live with her husband. could she stay with the person who raped her? then, was it rape at all? and what is all this rucuss about?
just as the reform of laws pertaining to sati, dowry and the like have been legislated, why could not there be a law to uphold human values? would a muslim have the priviledge to rape and escape by virtue of the application of the personal law?
does the muslim law permit rape? if no, then where is the dispute of application of the indian penal code and the cr.p.c.?
a rape is a rape. there is no hindu rape or muslim rape or christian rape. if rape is considered to be an offence, let the law of the land prevail.
if a hindu man raped a muslim woman or a muslim man raped a hindu woman, would the law be adapted by their religion?
atleast here, let there be no politics. once again, a rape is a rape and should be considered to be a rape. religion and politics should not and can not be mixed in such cases.
