295-A.  Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.--Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings, of any class of the citizens of Pakistan, by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representations insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to [Ten] years, or with fine or with both.

COMMENTARY

1.  Scope. Foreign book containing objectionable reading injuring feelings of Muslims in general-Section not applicable. PLD 1962 Lah. 850. Special Court taking cognizance recording evidence convicting the accused without adverting to the aspect of the absence of requisite sanctions as required by S. 196, Cr.P.C. for an offence under this section. Proceeding nullity in the eye of law quashed. 2000 PCr.LJ 902.

2. Blasphemy. Historical background and legislation of law in Pakistan. PLD 2002 Lah. 587. Muslim cannot be attributed blasphemy because if he commits an offence u/S. 295-C, it will amount to apostasy and he becomes a murtid (a person who repudiates Islam after embarrassing it). PLD 2002 Lah. 587.

Mere bald statement of some persons about some Muslims is not sufficient to believe that the person had ceased to be a muslim unless said person himself confessed the same. Case not covered within the provisions of S. 295-A PPC. 2006 YLR 1766 (Lahore).

Derogatory remarks in respect of the Holy Prophet (P.B.U.H.). FIR was not lodged by a competent duly authorized person of Central or Provincial Govt. and the trial Court was not competent to take cognizance of the case u/S. 196 of Cr.P.C. and in such eventuality the trial was without lawful authority. Evidence led by the prosecution did not inspire confidence against accused. Prosecution case was based upon a solitary interested witness which did not find corroboration from any corner. Evidence of prosecution witnesses was not trust worthy. Investigation was also conducted by police in hasty manner without going into the depth of the gravity of offence. PLJ 2008 Cr.C. (Lahore) 85.

Accused must act with intention to insult the religious of any class of persons with the knowledge that any class of persons is likely to consider such destruction, damage or defilement as insult to their religion. Question of. Whether there was such intention to insult must emerge from the evidence of the case. Validity. Any derogatory word was uttered by accused with intent to insult. Complainant and the appellant had some criminal cases against each other which led doubt that complainant with mala fide intention involved the accused in the case, thus possibility of false implication cannot be ruled out. PLJ 2008 Cr.C. (Lahore) 85.

Accused were seen while over running under his feet the pages of Holy Quran. No enmity or mala fide of prosecution for the false implication of accused. Apprehension of accused at the spot was not denied. Suggestion of an insane and mentally retarted person and a run-away patient for psychiatric disease at the time of occurrence. Proved of. Prosecution had failed to produce any evidence on record to rebut the version of appellant supported by the evidence that he was not in a state of insanity at the time of occurrence. Accused cannot be held guilty for the offence u/S. 295-B PPC. PLJ 2007 Cr.C. (Lahore) 962.