Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 526 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Samiullah vs State S

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 526 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Samiullah VS State S. 497(2)---Prevention of Electronic Crimes act (XL of 2016), Ss. 9, 10 & 11---Penal Code ( XLV of 1860 ), Ss. 295-a, 295-B, 295-C, 298-a & 109---Blaspheme content as social media forums---Bail, grant of---Collecting evidence, deficiency in---Further inquiry---Record revealed that no record from the cellular service provider had yet been obtained to confirm that the applicant was the person in whose name the company issued the SIM---While the F.I.a. claimed that the phone with the SIM was recovered from the applicant's possession, a bare look at the memo of arrest and recovery showed that they left much to be desired---F.I.a.'s casual approach was apparent---The seizure had been made during an inquiry---Record was vague on how the applicant was apprehended and then arrested---The only seizure witness who had recorded a S.161, Cr.P.C. statement did not identify the person from whom recovery was made---The seizure memo, the statements of the witnesses to the seizure, nor any other document showed that the phone allegedly recovered from the applicant was sealed on the spot---On the contrary, from the seizure onwards, it seemed that the phone had been changing hands freely---Whatever little evidence was on file regarding forensic analysis also did not reveal that the laboratory received the phone in a sealed condition---No call data record of the applicant had been obtained to corroborate dissemination---as a matter of prudence, a person with information about an offence committed should report it to law enforcement agencies rather than proceed to conduct a sting operation on their own, pretending to be a woman, as was the position in the present case---No one stopped the F.I.a. from proceeding against any offence, but its choices could not be selective---No investigation had been done regarding the Whatsapp group and the Facebook page from where the issue arose---How the evidence was collected did not permit suspending the applicant's fundamental rights and made his case one of further inquiry---Looking at the gravity of this case (apart from blasphemy, there were other aspects of extreme concern), as an exception, it would be appropriate to direct the F.I.a. to expand its investigation, seek the requisite approvals required by law and use its best efforts to bring a watertight case to court---applicant was admitted to post-arrest bail, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 526 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Samiullah vs State S — 2025 PCrLJ 526 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PCRLJ