A Karachi Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) on Wednesday acquitted Baloch Yakjehti Committee (BYC) leader Dr Mahrang Baloch in a sedition and public outrage case registered against her in October last year.
Mahrang had been booked in the terrorism case by the Quaidabad police of Malir district on October 11, 2024, for allegedly inciting people by leveling “allegations against security institutions”.
ATC Judge Ayaz Mustafa Jokhio today announced the verdict on Mahrang’s acquittal plea in the case, filed by lawyer Jibran Nasir.
“I am of the opinion that there is no likelihood of the accused being convicted of any offence. I hereby allow this application and acquit the accused, Ms. Mahrang Baloch, d/o Abdul Ghaffar,” the court order said.
The human rights activist was acquitted of the charges under section 265-K (power of court to acquit accused at any stage) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
Mahrang, according to the court order, appeared via video link from Quetta prison, where she was imprisoned after her arrest in March. Despite her acquittal in the Karachi case, the activist cannot be released as other cases are pending against her.
In the order, a copy of which is available with SunriseJudge Jokhio said he considered the arguments of Mahrang’s lawyer, the state prosecutor, and also reviewed the material on record.
“In this regard, the complainant has not presented independent witnesses to substantiate his claim,” the judge observed.
He noted that the investigation officer had summoned five witnesses in the charge sheet and, apart from the complainant, “the rest [prosecution witnesses] “They are police officials who are unaware of the facts of the alleged incident.”
The judge further said that in their statements under Article 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the witnesses “had not said a single word about the alleged incident, which shows that they have no knowledge about the alleged incident.”
He noted that during the investigation, at the time of visiting the incident site, “neither IO called any private/independent witnesses from the locality nor asked the people of the area about the alleged incident.”
The judge noted that the case was registered in October 2024, while the challan was filed in August 2025, “after a delay of 10 months” without the IO providing any reason for the delay.
Justice Jokhio observed that “the purpose of the provisions of section 265-K of the CrPC is very clear and never prevents a court from acquitting an accused at any stage of the case.”
“It can be seen here that in view of [the] “There are a large number of cases pending, instead of allowing the plaintiff/prosecution to present weak, deficient and inadmissible proposed evidence at trial, it is high time for the trial courts to exercise the vast power vested in them, to save precious time of the public.”
On the issue of the charge not being framed, the judge said it was a “well-settled law that the court can exercise the power under section 265-K CrPC even before framing the charge.”
The judge also noted that the author did not appear in court despite the police being ordered to produce him.
Manufactured Case: Mahrang
Mahrang called the case “fabricated” and said it showed “how the state had become increasingly uncomfortable” with his activism.
The first information report (FIR) was registered on the complaint of a resident named Asad Ali Shams, who claimed that Mahrang was inciting violence in his area.
The complainant accused her of instigating people against the State and its institutions and also alleged that Mahrang had links with terrorist groups operating in Balochistan.
The FIR invoked Section 7 (punishment for acts of terrorism) of the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) 1997, as well as Sections 124-A (‘sedition law’), 148 (rioting, armed with deadly weapon), 149 (any member of an unlawful assembly guilty of an offense committed in pursuit of a common objective), 153-A (promoting enmity between groups), 500 (punishment for defamation) and 505 (statement inducing public mischief) of the Pakistan Penal Code.
