disobeying the Command of Allah and His Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) would be punished on the Day of Judgment as well as during lifetime. He while further quoting some Hadiths submitted that the Holy Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) on various occasions ordered killing of persons found guilty of blasphemy.
Justice Khosa observed that there is a law available on blasphemy and the state is authorised to take legal action on blasphemy act rather than allowing an individual to take law into hands and committing a crime.
“The court is empowered to take legal action but not an individual,” Justice Khosa said. He questioned the counsel as to whether after the press conference of the former governor, did anybody complained to the government that Salman Taseer had committed blasphemy.
Justice Dost Muhammad Khan, another member of the bench, asked the counsel as to whether any petition was filed in a court of law after the press conference of Salman Taseer. The counsel informed the court that one petition was filed in the High Court but it was not entertained, adding that an application was also filed in a police station however, it was too not entertained.
Justice Khosa observed that the accused was a serving policeman and a guard at the time of the governor’s murder.
Justice Dost Muhammad Khan observed that there were many sects in the Ulema of the country and the misuse of blasphemy law is also an issue.
Counsel for the petitioner contended that misuse is another issue but here a person had declared the blasphemy law as black law which no one can tolerate.
He further submitted that Mumtaz Qadri was a simple guard and he even did not dare to talk to the former governor but maybe Salman Taseer had uttered some words which could not be tolerated by the accused and he opened fire while the rest of other guards present on the occasion did not respond. He contended that the Islamabad High Court did not examine the material of Islamic history.
Justice Khosa observed that they have great respect to all the teachings of Quran and Sunnah and they have learnt a lot during the arguments of the learned counsel. However, he said that matter pertaining to the Islamic teachings and religious matters does not come either in the jurisdiction of High Court and Supreme Court under Article 203 (g)(g) of the Constitution and only the Federal Shariat Court has the jurisdiction to adjudicate upon such matters.
He asked the counsel to conclude his arguments today (Wednesday) focusing as to how the examples of the Hadiths can be applied in today’s society and adjourned the hearing.