The Riots of 1953 — Page 66
66 ی ا. ئ ی. اِن س ب ےک وخن اک دبہل ل ی ا اج� ہ ُوین الم لتق رکواےت آےئ � ف � ی � ُادبا�ی وین ےس لم )۲( اہ اخبری ےس ش (۱) اطعء اہلل � ےس ی ف ش ُا دمحم � لم )۴( ُاااشتحم اقحل ےس لم )۳( 12 وسار) ےس ی ُا ومدودی (�پاوچن� لم )۵( A. Yes. A complaint about this writing was made to me by a man from Montgomery and I asked for an explanation from the Nazir concerned. He informed me that he had asked the editor to contradict it. Q. Did the contradiction come to your knowledge? A. No, but I have just now been shown the article “ek ghalati ka izala” in the “Alfazl” of 7th August 1952 in which the writing in question has been explained. To Court:- Q. Had the maulvis who are described as Mullas in this editorial expressed the opinion that Ahmadis are apostates and liable to capital punishment? A. I only know that Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi had expressed that opinion. To counsel continued:- Q. Did you say the following in the “Tashheez-ul-Azhan” for the month of June 1919 at page 38: ڑھکا وہ ب دورسا ےلہپ ےک اقم� ی وہ. وج دعب م ت ل�یفہ وہ وت وج الہپ وہ ایکس �ب�یع� ف �“ ب ب ب ےہ. � ت ” ےہ وت اُےس لتق رکدو. رگم � ی لتق اک مکح � ی الوہر م ی ب اجےئ �“ 13. ” ت رک کس ی ف ا � ی مہ ا� ی م ت تنطلس اینپ وہ. اب اس وکحم A. No. The diarist was a novice and misinterpreted what I told him. I explained what I had actually said after the Lahore sect of Ahmadis had made a complaint to the Government and the Government had asked for an explanation from me.