Landmark verdict

This wisdom of the judges is appreciated and, in fact, this is where the entire conundrum had rested all these decades

Blasphemy cases have for long been a blot on our social conscience and law. The Supreme Court, while making some pertinent observations, has rightly called for exercising utmost care when dealing with blasphemy cases, and to ensure that civil dignity, rule of law and freedom of speech are not compromised. One of the most startling remarks of the learned bench was that such cases receive wide publicity, and often result in adversely jeopardising a fair trial. This wisdom of the honourable judges is appreciated and, in fact, this is where the entire conundrum had rested all these decades since the legislation came into force in 1985.

In a detailed judgment, while hearing the post-arrest bail request of a sanitary worker accused of blasphemy, the bench observed that many a time false allegations are levelled to settle personal scores and cases are also registered on account of ulterior motives. The court said the keen interest expressed by private complainants, and often joined by many others, is meant to pressurise the prosecution and the courts, and go on to impinge on the credibility of plaintiffs for vested objectives. Keeping in view the trajectory of vandalism, pressure tactics and defiance of law, these observations are perfectly ordained, and must come as a preamble for precaution while booking such cases and moving on for effectuation of relevant laws.

What makes the judgment a landmark are apt observations that irresponsible and sensational broadcasts and publications, repeating the alleged story details, are tantamount to committing the same offence. That is, indeed, so and goes on to further the fissures of hate and attempts to resort to lawlessness. That is why the bench ordered that while Section 295-C offence prescribes only punishment by death, the allegation and subsequent trial must be free from mischievous acts. From police to inquiry officers, and from filing of challan to the process of trial, what is desired is sustained recourse to law by keeping in mind that the benefit of the doubt must go to the accused. And this is what Islamic jurisprudence is all about to exercise caution and compassion all the way.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 4^th, 2022.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.