Mubarak Sani bail case: SC says didn’t deviate from laid down principles

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Wednesday announced its reserved verdict on a review petition filed by the Punjab government and others against the grant of bail to a sacrilege accused Maubarik Ahmad Sani.

While the court declared that no one can be Muslim without absolute and unqualified faith finality of the Prophethood of Muhammad (peace be upon him), it maintained that it did not deviate in any way from the decisions of the Federal Shariat Court (FSC) and the Supreme Court.

The court also held that that the fundamental right of religious freedom, guaranteed under the Constitution, is subject to law, morality and public order.

A three-member SC bench, headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, and comprising Justice Irfan Saadat Khan and Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan, announced the reserved judgment in the review petition of the Punjab government against the bail of blasphemy accused Mubarik Sani for preaching Qadiyaniat and distributing the banned book Tafsir Sagheer.

The court, on May 29, had reserved the judgment in Punjab government review petition, filed against its order. Justice Naeem Afghan announced the judgment, authored by CJP Qazi Faez Isa.

The accused was arrested under various provisions of printing the Quran and blasphemy regarding the publication of the book. He had approached the high court for bail and upon refusal, he approached the Supreme Court.

On February 6, 2024, a two-member SC bench comprising Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Musarrat Hilali had issued written order in the petition, filed by Mubarak Ahmed Sani against the orders dated 16-10-2023and 27-11-2023, respectively of the Lahore High Court passed in Crl. Revision No. 68011/2023 and Crl. Misc. No. 41772-B/2023.

The court, after hearing the matter, had declared that since the petitioner had already served the maximum imprisonment of six months, prescribed for the offence, if he was found to be guilty of having committed it, keeping him incarcerated would violate a number of his fundamental rights. Article 9 of the Constitution stipulates that a person shall not be deprived of his liberty in accordance with the law; the law no longer permits his detention.

The court had held that Article 10A of the Constitution guarantees right to a fair trial and due process, which too the petitioner was now being denied. In addition to violation of these two fundamental rights is the overarching right stipulated in Article 4 of the Constitution.

The court had further held that the petitioner was no longer being treated in accordance with the law because while waiting for the conclusion of his trial, he had remained imprisoned for a period much longer than what he could have been punished for if he was found guilty.

Later, the court had granted bail to the accused; however, the order of the court was misinterpreted through social media, due to which chaos spread across the country and toxic and baseless propaganda started against CJP Qazi Faez Isa.

Later on, the Punjab government, through the prosecutor general, filed a review petition under Article 188 of the Constitution seeking recalling of the apex court order passed on February 6, whereby the court had allowed the appeals of Mubarak Ahmed Sani and the order passed by the Lahore High Court dated October 16, 2023 was set aside.

The Punjab prosecutor general sought modification of the judgment on the ground that in para 9 of the judgment, the finding of the apex court regarding Article 20 of the of the Constitution needed to be modified to the extent that the rights of the citizens, as envisaged under the said Article, are not absolute and subject to law, morality and public order.

It was prayed that the Supreme Court may kindly review and modify the judgment under review in the interest of justice.

The petitioner had sought the deletion of certain charges from the charge framed against him. He was charged for three offences pursuant to the case arising out of FIR No. 661/22 registered against him on Dec 6, 2022, at Police Station Chenab Nagar, District Chiniot.

The court, during the course of hearing of the review petition, also sought assistance from various schools of thought, including the Islamic Ideological Council, for religious and Shariah interpretation in this matter, and on May 29, 2024, the court had reserved the judgment.