ISLAMABAD – The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has issued a scathing nine-page judgment highlighting serious flaws in the handling of blasphemy cases, citing evidence of entrapment, investigative negligence, procedural irregularities, and even custodial deaths.
Authored by Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan after 42 hearings, the judgment underscores why forming an independent inquiry commission is crucial. The court noted that there are around 400 FIRs and 700 accused in online blasphemy cases, with many alleging they were deliberately entrapped — a claim never properly investigated.
Entrapment by a mysterious figure
The court flagged repeated allegations involving a woman named Imaan (real name Komal), who allegedly lured multiple unconnected individuals into similar blasphemy traps. Despite these uniform claims, investigators failed to probe her role.
Imaan reportedly vanished after her identity was exposed, and her phone number was linked to Rao Abdul Rahim, identified in a Punjab Police Special Branch report as the ringleader of a blasphemy gang.
Disturbing patterns and planted evidence
The judgment revealed startling inconsistencies:
Facebook IDs and passwords surrendered to the FIA were mysteriously reused in later FIRs.
Videos showed private individuals, not officials, arresting suspects outside Layyah University in a car linked to Rao Abdul Rahim, despite FIA claiming it was an official arrest.
Some accused had their phones seized by private actors, raising the possibility of planted evidence or deletion of entrapment conversations.
The court also noted the FIA admitted it often failed to conduct forensic analysis of complainants’ devices, despite entrapment allegations.
Illegal arrests, bribes, and a shadowy NGO
Evidence suggested some arrests were carried out unlawfully, with one victim’s father alleging FIA officers demanded bribes and filed cases when payment wasn’t made.
The so-called Legal Commission on Blasphemy, run by Rao Abdul Rahim, was found to be unregistered with any legal authority, making its operations highly questionable.
Custodial deaths and torture allegations
Perhaps most troubling, four accused died in custody without any judicial or administrative inquiry. One video played in court allegedly showed visible bruises and torture marks on a deceased prisoner.
Legal contradictions and lack of mens rea
The court pointed out that investigators ignored the concept of mens rea (criminal intent), which is essential in blasphemy cases. Many FIRs were rushed through—some investigations, evidence gathering, and FIR registrations were completed in a single day, violating FIA’s own SOPs.
Why the commission is necessary
The court emphasized that despite a National Commission for Human Rights (NCHR) report in October 2024 and a Punjab Special Branch report in January 2024 naming key suspects, the federal government failed to act.
Justice Khan wrote: “I am at an utter loss to understand which other matter would qualify as one of general interest or of vital public concern if this case does not pass the statutory test.”
Court’s directives
The IHC has ordered the federal government to form an inquiry commission within 30 days. The commission must complete its findings in four months and submit a notification to the court for review. Copies of the order will be sent to the Cabinet Division, Attorney General, Advocate General, and other relevant authorities.
The case has been adjourned until December 15.
This landmark order exposes deep-rooted flaws in how blasphemy cases are pursued and signals an unprecedented judicial effort to bring transparency and accountability to a highly sensitive issue.
