Punjab CM Maryam Nawaz raises alarm over alleged bribe to silence azerbaijani rape survivor
An alleged Rs 20 million payoff puts Pakistan’s justice system under scrutiny as CM Maryam Nawaz demands accountability

Razi Wani
Producer - News Desk
Razi Ud Din Ahmed Wani is a multimedia journalist and digital storyteller with a strong background in fact-checking, South Asian politics, documentary filmmaking, scriptwriting, and digital content production. With an MA in Mass Communication from the University of Karachi, he has experience directing and scripting web series and socio-political satires. And has worked across various media and digital platforms, focusing on emerging trends and storytelling formats.

Punjab Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz Sharif intervened in a high-profile gang-rape case involving an Azerbaijani national, alleging that the affluent family of prime suspect Ahmed Tanveer offered a bribe of up to Rs 20 million (2 crore) to buy the survivor’s silence, raising serious concerns regarding judicial corruption in the granting of pre-arrest bail in an X post on Friday.
What did Maryam Nawaz Sharif allege regarding bribery and judicial integrity?
Taking to social media platform X, the Chief Minister addressed the systemic vulnerabilities faced by sexual assault survivors confronting elite influence, warning that wealthy perpetrators cannot be permitted to evade criminal accountability.
In a recent rape case, it was revealed that the accused’s wealthy family allegedly offered 1.5–2 crore to the victim in exchange for withdrawing her allegations, despite her statement already having been recorded under Section 164. It was further alleged that the judge who granted bail to the accused had also been bribed. If these allegations are true, they raise deeply disturbing questions about the integrity of the justice system and the vulnerability of rape survivors to financial pressure and the misuse of power. I will continue to keep a close eye on such cases to ensure that no rapist or perpetrator escapes justice simply because he has money, influence, or connections. Justice must never be for sale, and no one should be above the law.
— Maryam Nawaz Sharif (@MaryamNSharif) October 23, 2026
"In a recent rape case, it was revealed that the accused’s wealthy family allegedly offered 1.5–2 crore to the victim in exchange for withdrawing her allegations, despite her statement already having been recorded under Section 164. It was further alleged that the judge who granted bail to the accused had also been bribed," Maryam Nawaz stated.
"If these allegations are true, they raise deeply disturbing questions about the integrity of the justice system and the vulnerability of rape survivors to financial pressure and the misuse of power. I will continue to keep a close eye on such cases to ensure that no rapist or perpetrator escapes justice simply because he has money, influence, or connections. Justice must never be for sale, and no one should be above the law."
How did the alleged assault and the victim's sudden retractions unfold?
The Chief Minister’s public remarks follow a dramatic reversal in the case of the survivor, identified as an Azerbaijani tourist named Diana. The incident was first reported in late September when the victim filed a complaint stating she had been drugged at a local café in Lahore and transported to an apartment in the Defence Housing Authority (DHA). There, she alleged she was assaulted by multiple men, including prime suspect Ahmed Tanveer, before being abandoned near Allama Iqbal International Airport with her personal belongings and mobile phones stolen.
Following her initial complaint, Diana recorded formal testimony before a judicial magistrate under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), in which she detailed the sexual assault and directly named the perpetrators. Police secured medical examinations and forensic evidence, and took two co-suspects into custody.
However, the case took an unexpected turn when recorded video statements surfaced online. In footage dated October 9, Diana retracted her allegations, stating that Tanveer had neither assaulted her nor taken her property, claiming her earlier complaint had been made under duress and requesting that the case be quashed.
In a subsequent video message recorded after her return to Baku, Diana gave a blanket clean chit to Tanveer, asserting that she had wanted to clarify her statement before the court in Lahore but had been warned her life was in danger. She further claimed she had been escorted out of Pakistan before being afforded the chance to record an amended statement, adding that she forgave the other suspects.
How are Punjab government and Lahore Police pursuing the prosecution?
Despite the recorded retractions, the Punjab provincial administration and Lahore Police rejected the video statements, treating them as an orchestrated attempt to derail legal proceedings. Punjab Information Minister Azma Bukhari clarified on Friday that the provincial government will continue prosecuting the case on behalf of the state, maintaining that in cases of sexual violence, the state functions as the ultimate protector of justice.
Deputy Inspector General (DIG) of Police Syed Zeeshan Raza confirmed that Diana’s magistrate-recorded Section 164 CrPC testimony remains admissible substantive evidence in court alongside forensic laboratory documentation. Police authorities also pushed back against claims of forced deportation, noting that Diana departed for Baku on a commercial flight under diplomatic and police escort at the formal request of the Azerbaijani Embassy.
On Friday, Lahore police took Ahmed Tanveer into custody outside the courtroom, despite assertions by his defense counsel that he was protected by pre-arrest interim relief. Specialized investigative units have opened formal inquiries into both the financial trail surrounding the alleged Rs 15–20 million settlement transaction and the conduct of judicial officers involved in granting the suspect relief.
Punjab’s prosecution department is finalizing formal charges under non-compoundable anti-rape statutory provisions, where victim retractions do not mandate case dismissal.







Comments
See what people are discussing