AKBAR and others vs THE STATE
These criminal bail applications arose out of a common order where the applicants sought post-arrest bail in a case registered under Sections 489-F, 2D5-A, and 295 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The core legal question was whether the pasting of a photostat portrait containing images of Kaaba and Roza-e-Rasool along with certain Urdu inscriptions constituted an offense under Sections 295, 295-A, or 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code, warranting the withholding of bail. The court held that the material on record did not disclose anything derogatory to the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), that criminal intent was a matter to be established at trial, that Section 489-F was inapplicable, and that a prosecution under Section 295-A required a direct complaint under Section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Consequently, the court confirmed the bail granted to the applicants. The key principles laid down include that mere pasting of religious photographs for business purposes without prima facie derogatory content does not attract penal provisions relating to blasphemy or deliberate outrage of religious feelings at the bail stage, and that statutory prerequisites like a direct complaint under Section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure must be satisfied for Section 295-A of the Pakistan Penal Code.
- Does the pasting of a photostat paper containing religious images and Urdu text constitute a derogatory act under Section 295-A of the Pakistan Penal Code without proof of criminal intent?
- Is a direct complaint required under Section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for initiating proceedings under Section 295-A of the Pakistan Penal Code?
- Does Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code apply to the distribution or pasting of religious portraits in a shop?
- Section 489-F, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 295-A, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 295, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 196, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 295-C, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' I intend to decide bail applications Nos.679 of 2003 and 647 of 2003 by this single order as they arise out of the same bail order.
2. Briefly. The facts giving rise to these bail applications are that on 28-11-2003, one Muhammad Shahid, lodged F.I.R. At Police Station, Tando Adam, alleging therein that on 27-11-2002 he, P.Ws.
Muhammad Sadiq and Muhammad Rafique, saw one yellow colour portrait which was pasted in a bond shop belonging to accused . Akbar Marwari, situated in Shah Complex Centre, Tando Adam, wherein photo of Kabatullah and Rozz-e-Rasool was printed. Following words were inscribed in Urdu language on the aforesaid portrait:-- {{URDU TEXT}} ' On seeing it, they enquired from owner of the shop who disclosed that said paper was prepared at Faisalabad. The complainant removed the photostat paper and took it to Ulmah of Jama Mosque who after seeing it, directed him to lodge the report. The complainant thereafter lodged the F.I.R.
' I have heard Mr. Qurban Ali H. Chauhan and Mr. Khuwaja Naveed Ahmed, Advocates for the applicants as well as Mr. Rashid A. Qureshi, Asstt. A.-G. For the State. The latter has opposed the bail plea of accused.
3. The perusal of record shows that the applicants had prepared photo-stat copies, wherein photos of Kabatullah and Roza-e-Rasool was printed, whereas the aforesaid words in Urdu were inscribed.
The only serious objection by the complainant is that this photo-stat was pasted at the bond shop, belonging to accused Akbar and was prepared and photo-stated by the co-accused Abdul Waheed and Mujahid Ali alias Mujahid. I do not find anything in the photo-stat which could be imagined to be derogatory qua to Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). The criminal intention of accused in printing these Urdu words or photo stating the Kabatullah and Roza-e- Rasool are yet to be established at the trial. Merely, the pasting of photo-stat of Kabatullah or Roza-e-Rasool for flourishing the business cannot be termed to be derogatory to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Final challan of the case has been submitted under sections 489-F, 295-A and 295, P.P.C. Section 4C,9-F would not be attracted in the present circumstances.
So far 295-A, P.P.C. Is concerned, the complainant has to file a direct complaint as provided under section 196, Cr.P.C. Section 295, P.P.C. Is punishable for two years. Final challan has not been submitted under section 295-C, P.P.C. For these reasons the accused were ordered to be released on bail vide short order dated 12-12-2003. These are the reasons for the same.