The Mubarak Sani case in Pakistan has garnered significant attention due to its complex legal and religious implications. Mubarak Ahmad Sani was accused of offences under the Punjab Holy Quran (Printing and Recording) (Amendment) Act, 2021, and sections 298-C and 295-B of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC). The charges related to distributing prohibited literature, specifically “Tafseer-e-Sagheer,” and actions deemed sacrilegious by the authorities. The case became highly controversial because the alleged offences took place before the amendment to the law in 2021, which meant that Sani was initially convicted for actions that were not illegal at the time they occurred.
On 6th February 2024, (via Criminal Petitions No.1054-L and 1344-L of 2023) the Supreme Court of Pakistan overturned Mubarik Sani’s conviction, ruling that since his actions were not criminalized until after they occurred, the charges against him were invalid. This decision, however, led to widespread criticism, particularly from religious groups and political entities, who argued that the ruling undermined Islamic principles, particularly regarding the Ahmadiyya community, which has been declared non-Muslim under Pakistani law.A copy of this Decision can be found here.
Subsequent to the ruling, the Punjab government, backed by various religious leaders and scholars, filed a review petition. The review resulted in the Supreme Court modifying its earlier decision. On 24th July 2024, the Court reiterated that while religious freedom is a fundamental right under the Constitution, it is subject to public order, morality, and law. The Court also removed certain controversial paragraphs from its judgment to address the concerns raised by the religious community, emphasizing that these omitted sections should not be used as judicial precedents.
The case has sparked a broader debate about the intersection of religious freedom and legal constraints in Pakistan, with significant involvement from religious scholars and political figures who have influenced the legal proceedings. The final ruling has been seen as a compromise, attempting to balance the strict interpretations of Islamic law with constitutional guarantees of individual rights, while also acknowledging the sensitivities surrounding the issue.
The most recent verdict in the Mubarak Sani case by the Supreme Court of Pakistan represents a significant and complex legal resolution with profound implications for religious freedom, the interpretation of Islamic law, and the balance between constitutional rights and public order.
Mubarak Ahmad Sani was initially convicted under the Punjab Holy Quran (Printing and Recording) (Amendment) Act, 2021, and various sections of the Pakistan Penal Code, including sections 298-C and 295-B. These charges were primarily related to the dissemination of proscribed literature that allegedly violated the sanctity of the Holy Quran and insulted religious sentiments. Importantly, the acts for which Sani was convicted occurred before the amendment of the law in 2021, raising questions about the retrospective application of criminal law.
The February 2024 Judgment in Mubarik Sani Case
In February 2024, a two-member bench of the Supreme Court overturned Sani’s conviction. The Court ruled that since the actions in question were not criminalized at the time they occurred, convicting Sani was unconstitutional. The decision was grounded in Article 12 of the Constitution of Pakistan, which prohibits the punishment of any act that was not an offence at the time it was committed. This ruling also touched on Article 20, which guarantees the right to profess, practice, and propagate religion, albeit within the bounds of law, morality, and public order.
The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (‘the Constitution’) stipulates that a person cannot be charged for something which was not an offence when it was done. Article 12(1) of the Constitution stipulates that: ‘12. (1) No law shall authorize the punishment of a person- (a) for an act or omission that was not punishable by law at the time of the act or omission; or (b) for an offence by a penalty greater than, or of a kind different from, the penalty prescribed by law for that offence at the time the offence was committed.’
The July 2024 Review of Mubarik Sani Case
Following the February judgment, there was significant backlash from religious groups and political factions. The Punjab government filed a review petition, leading to a revised judgment in July 2024. The Supreme Court, while upholding the principle that religious freedom is subject to law, morality, and public order, removed certain controversial paragraphs from its previous judgment. These paragraphs had sparked outrage, particularly because they touched upon the sensitive issue of the religious rights of the Ahmadiyya community in Pakistan.
The Court, in its revised judgment, also sought guidance from prominent religious scholars, including Mufti Taqi Usmani and Maulana Fazlur Rehman, to ensure that its decision aligned with Islamic principles while respecting constitutional guarantees. The Court’s removal of the contentious paragraphs and its acknowledgment that the initial judgment could not serve as a judicial precedent were significant concessions to the religious sensitivities involved in the case.
Legal Analysis of Mubarik Sani Case
The most recent verdict demonstrates the Supreme Court’s attempt to navigate the delicate balance between upholding constitutional rights and acknowledging the deeply rooted religious and cultural norms in Pakistan. The Court’s decision to amend its previous ruling, particularly by consulting religious scholars, underscores the judiciary’s sensitivity to public sentiment and the potential for social unrest.
From a legal standpoint, the Court’s approach highlights the ongoing tension between modern legal principles, such as the prohibition of ex post facto laws, and traditional Islamic jurisprudence, which plays a significant role in Pakistan’s legal system. The Court’s decision to exclude certain paragraphs from being used as precedents further complicates the legal landscape, as it creates ambiguity about the future application of similar legal principles.
The Supreme Court’s latest verdict in the Mubarak Sani case reflects a cautious and context-sensitive approach to a highly charged legal issue. By partially retracting its earlier stance and involving religious authorities, the Court has sought to maintain social harmony while adhering to constitutional mandates. However, this compromise may also raise concerns about the consistency and predictability of legal rulings in cases where religious sentiments are at stake. The long-term implications of this verdict will likely influence how future cases involving religious freedom and constitutional rights are adjudicated in Pakistan.
Call for Free Legal Advice +92-3048734889
Email : [email protected]
