Only state should deal with religious matters: SC

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Friday granted bail to an accused facing blasphemy charges for joining a “WhatsApp” group, which alleged­ly posted sacrilegious content, and obser­ved that the state, and not individuals, should have the authority to deal with the matters concerning religion.

“The state should not surrender itself to individuals on religious matters rather the state machinery should be used in such sensitive matters with great care in a proficient manner,” observed Justice Qazi Faez Isa, who was heading a two-judge SC bench also comprising Justice Yahya Afridi.

The bench, which had taken up the bail plea, regretted how the accused would defend himself when he had no idea about the nature of crime he committed.

The court allowed the bail petition subject to furnishing of a surety bond of Rs100,000 and said the present case needs further inquiry.

Grants bail to blasphemy accused

The accused had challenged the rejection of his bail application by La­­hore High Court’s Multan bench which was also seized with a review petition against framing of charges against him under the blasphemy section.

Deputy Attorney General (DAG) Shafqat Abbasi told Dawn that the accused was arrested from Layyah on April 22 this year by the Federal Investigation Agency’s (FIA) cybercrime wing on a complaint registered on April 6 under Section 295C of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC), which deals with offences for insulting religion as well as Section 11 of the Prevention of the Electronic Crime Act relating to hate speech.

Surprisingly, the complainant was not a member of the WhatsApp group and registered the complaint after one of his friends told him about the questionable text which the latter received on his cellphone.

The FIA later dropped Section 295C of the PPC from the challan after seeking an opinion from the Council of the Islamic Ideology (CII) which had held that the matter did not attract this section.

During the hearing, the apex court raised doubts and observed that how the accused would defend himself when he did not know about the nature of the allegations.

The SC bench was also not amused with the way FIA’s team conducted the inquiry, regretting that the investigation failed to explain whether the complainant was well conversant with the Arabic language since the social media group in which the objectionable text was posted was in Arabic.

The court noted that the CII opinion was not taken into account while framing charges against the accused by the trial court. “What is the purpose of CII if the opinion of the constitutional institution is not to be followed,” the court regretted.

The DAG told the court that since the case did not attract Section 295C, the FIA had dropped it from the complaint.