https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/1316638-man-acquitted-in-blasphemy-case-due-to-doubtful-testimony
Acquittal in Blasphemy Case Highlights the Centrality of Evidentiary Rigor and Procedural Compliance under Section 295-C PPC
By: Barrister S. M. Zulkufil Haider
In a recent judgment handed down by the Court of VIIth Additional Sessions Judge (East), Karachi, a man accused under Section 295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) for allegedly uttering blasphemous remarks was acquitted on grounds of insufficient and unreliable evidence. The ruling underscores the judiciary’s continuing insistence on strict adherence to procedural and evidentiary standards in cases carrying capital or near-capital consequences.
The case, registered at Ferozabad Police Station, stemmed from an incident in February 2024. The prosecution alleged that the accused had committed blasphemy following a verbal altercation with the complainant. However, the prosecution’s narrative quickly began to unravel during trial.
Critically, the complainant failed to mention any specific blasphemous remarks in the First Information Report (FIR), in the police challan, or during his oral evidence. When questioned, he explicitly stated that he could not repeat the alleged words due to their sacrilegious nature. A private witness also conceded that he did not hear any such remarks firsthand, relying instead on the complainant’s version. Notably, the complainant’s wife—who was present at the alleged scene—was not produced as a witness without any explanation offered by the prosecution.
Moreover, the investigation was not conducted by a police officer of or above the rank of Superintendent of Police, in clear violation of Section 156-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which mandates senior-level inquiry for offences under Section 295-C PPC. The Investigating Officer, an inspector, admitted this lapse during cross-examination. Such a violation of mandatory procedure rendered the investigation legally flawed and inadmissible.
The defense, led by Barrister S. M. Zulkufil Haider, argued that the accusation arose from a personal dispute after the accused objected to unsanitary conduct by the complainant. The blasphemy charge, it was contended, was used as a tool of vengeance rather than rooted in any actual offence.
The learned judge concluded that the case failed to meet the threshold of proof “beyond reasonable doubt,” acquitting the accused and directing his immediate release.
This judgment reinforces several key principles:
Specificity of Allegation: Vague or generalized accusations, especially in blasphemy cases, are insufficient without reproduction of the alleged offending language.
Evidentiary Caution: Witness testimony that is hearsay or speculative is inherently weak and cannot sustain conviction in a case with such grave implications.
Procedural Compliance: The requirement of an SP-led investigation under Section 156-A CrPC is not a mere formality. It is a statutory safeguard that cannot be bypassed without compromising the legality of the prosecution’s case.
Blasphemy cases remain among the most sensitive and potentially life-altering criminal proceedings in Pakistan. This acquittal is a reaffirmation of the rule of law and the judiciary’s constitutional duty to ensure that due process prevails over social pressure or prosecutorial zeal.