PHC upholds life term in Quran desecration case - Verdict details inside
The PHC found no major flaws in the evidence presented during the trial. The Peshawar High Court dismissed the appeal of a man convicted in a Quran desecration case linked to an incident that took place more than five years ago. The court upheld the life imprisonment sentence awarded by the trial court.
A bench comprising Justice Sahibzada Asadullah and Justice Babar Sattar ruled that the available evidence had been properly examined by the trial court. The judges stated that the conviction was based on a careful assessment of the record.
The appellant and another accused had been convicted on March 14, 2025. They were found guilty under Section 295-B of the Pakistan Penal Code for desecration of the Holy Quran and under Section 297 for trespassing at a burial place.
The trial court awarded life imprisonment under Section 295-B and an additional one-year sentence under Section 297. While the present appellant challenged the verdict, the second convict did not file an appeal.
The high court later issued a detailed 49-page judgment explaining the reasons behind its decision. The ruling discussed the evidence, witness statements and legal aspects of the case in detail.
According to the prosecution, villagers noticed suspicious activity near a graveyard after offering Taraveeh prayers at a nearby mosque. When they reached the site, they allegedly found the accused involved in burning pages of the Holy Quran.
The prosecution further claimed that an injured puppy and a bloodstained knife were found at the scene. Investigators alleged that the accused were attempting to perform acts related to sorcery and occult practices.
The court noted that multiple witnesses gave detailed accounts of the incident. It observed that their statements remained consistent regarding the main facts of the case.
Also read: Bridge costing Rs130 million in Punjab collapses just months after completion
According to the judgment, the witnesses faced lengthy cross-examinations but their testimonies remained largely intact. The bench said the defense could not identify any major contradiction that would weaken the prosecution’s case.
The court also observed that the defense failed to prove any personal enmity or motive that could have led witnesses to falsely accuse the convicts. This factor strengthened the credibility of the prosecution’s evidence.
Referring to Islamic teachings, the judgment discussed Quranic verses and Prophetic traditions regarding sorcery. The bench stated that Islamic sources strongly condemn magic and similar practices and warn about their consequences.
However, the court clarified that its observations on religious teachings were made only in the context of the case. The judges stated that those remarks were not intended to predetermine any other legal matter involving the accused.
The bench declared, “It is not the function of a court of law to convict on the basis of emotion, public sentiment, religious outrage, or philosophical reflection nor is it the purpose of these introductory observations to suggest that the accused must necessarily be guilty of the allegations levelled against them.”
“No individual can be condemned merely because the allegations against him appear grave, offensive, or morally disturbing. The law requires proof, and proof alone. Accordingly, this Court does not approach the present matter with a preconceived conclusion,” the court remarked.
