Islamabad:
The High Court of Islamabad (IHC) has provided detailed reasons explaining why the training of a commission of inquiry is necessary to probe the cases of blasphemy, invoking serious concerns concerning trapping, official negligence and deaths of childcare.
In a written judgment of nine pages written by judge Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan following 42 hearings in a blasphemy case, the court underlined the seriousness of the case and the need for in -depth investigation.
“There are now around 400 FIR and around 700 accused in cases of online blasphemy, with a good number of accused by claiming a trapping which has never been studied. I am a total loss to understand what other question would be considered one of the general interests or a vital concern for the public if this case would not pass the statutory test”, the notes of judgment.
The court justified the constitution of a commission of inquiry by emphasizing the prolonged inaction of the federal government, despite the report of the National Commission for Human Rights (NCH) in October 2024 recommending the formation of a commission or a JIT, to investigate the presumed existence of a gang linked to blasphemy.
“The inaction of the federal government despite the January 2024 report in the Punjab police special branch appointing the members of the alleged gang and giving enough base to justify a deeper investigation on the issue,” notes the order.
The judgment underlines that no investigation has never been carried out to identify or question the mysterious girl known as “Imaan”, despite several unconnected accused from different parts of the country claiming to have been trapped by it in an almost identical way.
The court said it was essential to determine how such uniform complaints could arise and why it had not raised red flags for investigators.
“The sudden disappearance of this Imaan girl (real name Komal) of her matrimonial home and also of her parents’ house after her role was exposed during this procedure, and she was not found despite the efforts of the NCCIA / FIA on the ordinances of this Court.”
The order continues: “The number in the use of IMAAN being certainly linked to Rao Abdul Rahim who, according to the report of the special branch, was the main person of the blasphemy gang.”
He also notes disturbing inconsistencies in the way the evidence has been managed.
“Identifiers and Facebook passwords given to the FIA in complaints are used again in subsequent complaints without any explanation from the FIA or complainants on how the said identifiers and passwords were used by complainants in new FIRs with the IDs already recovered with passwords.”
The court also saw videos played during procedures, one of which showing the arrest of an accused in the FIR n ° 52/2024 outside the Layyah University by individuals in a white car.
“The Registration Number is admittedly that of Rao Abdul Rahim (Though he denied in short that car was his) and the investigation record not record the time of his arrest, but, rather ridiculously, recording that, per the secret infirm’s report, the accused was standing the gates of lyyah university whereupon the Io Left Islamabad and was able to arrest the accused Still Standing Outside the Gates of Layyah University Despite the Journey Time Between Islamabad and Layyah being about 5 hours.
Other serious shortcomings have also been highlighted.
“The frank admission by the agents of the investigators of the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency / FIA according to which, in many cases, they have not carried out detailed medico-legal proof of the complaints of the complainant, which is quite inexplicable given the trapping position by several accused.”
“The absence of any convincing explanation of FIA / NCCIA officials, who attended the hearings throughout, as for the reason why no investigation has ever been carried out to identify the original creators of blasphemous content.”
The court also noted that the key legal concept of Mens REA – Criminal intention – has never been properly examined in the majority of FIR: “The position of the trapping, equivalent to the absence of Mens REA, having never been properly and fully investigated before the Challans were submitted in many FIR.”
He also expressed his concerns about procedural irregularities. “The videos played before the court showing certain members of the alleged gang carrying out private arrests, who were practiced by FIA officers in investigation files, and who have undoubtedly led the accused’s phones in the hands of private persons, who cannot exclude the planting of evidence on these phones or the abolition of trapping conversations by the body or to the knowledge of complaints.”
In a case, a father of an accused appeared in a video saying that the FIA demanded a bribes and that a case was recorded when he did not pay: “A video played in court with the poor father of an accused claiming the request for illegal gratuity by the FIA and the FIR accommodation when he remained unable to pay”.
The court also documented a disturbing scheme involving Rao Abdul Rahim: “The exemption from Rao Abdul Rahim in FIR 73/2022 by the deceased by Abdullah Shah’s father, after the latter was involved in the same FIR by Mudassir Shah, Deputy Director, FIA, to the transfer of RAO, despite the declaration, despite the declaration, despite the declaration, despite the declaration, despite the declaration, Despite the declaration, despite the declaration, despite the declaration, despite the declaration, despite the declaration, despite the declaration, despite the declaration, despite the declaration, despite the fact that the declaration was interim Challan showing a clear connection and admitted with the telephone number connecting Rao Abdul Rahim holding the last conversation with the deceased.
Other disturbing revelations include: “Rao Abdul Rahim’s clerk poses as a woman on certain discussion groups that have led to the recording of complaints.”
“The admission of the NCCIA expert according to which, in many FIRs, appropriate forensic evidence of the complainant’s phone should also have been carried out but have never been carried out.”
“The completion of the investigation, the investigation and the registration of certain FIRs on the same day in violation of the FIA SOP.”
The court also questioned the legitimacy of an organization: “the so-called” legal commission on blasphemy “, presenting itself as an NGO, led by Rao Abdul Rahim, when it is not registered under the applicable law or listed in an official Database of Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) or Federal Board Rendering status and activities.
Even more serious was the death of guard.
“Four accused of blasphemy which die in prison, without the judicial or administrative investigation putting itself in these guardian deaths, with a video played in court showing visible bruises and signs of torture that would have resulted in their guard during their guard.”
The order adds that “several other similar circumstances, whose details are recorded in the provisional orders in this case”.
The Court concluded that “there is no doubt that it is indeed a question of final public interest”.
Consequently, the court ordered the federal government to constitute a commission of inquiry within 30 days, including the suggested members and the mandate, as indicated in the previous order of the court dated January 31, 2025. The commission must complete its procedure within four months.
The ordinance also declared that the government notification establishing the committee must be subject to the court within 30 days. The office of the court was invited to place the file with the notification before the Chamberpers judge.
“The office is responsible for transmitting copies of this order to the secretary, division of the cabinet, with the management aimed at moving the required summary to the federal government.”
“Copies will also be transmitted to the offices of the Savory Attorney General and the Advocate General, and to other offices which can be relevant to the purpose of diligent implementation of this order.”
The hearing was adjourned until December 15.
