ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Wednesday granted journalist Sohrab Barkat post-arrest bail against surety bonds worth Rs200,000 in a case registered under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (Peca).
The case against Mr Barkat has been registered over accusations of spreading misinformation about state institutions during an interview he conducted.
A two-member bench headed by Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and including Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb took up Mr Barkat’s bail petition in the case, which was filed against a Jan 21 order of the Lahore High Court (LHC) that had rejected the journalist’s previous bail plea.
The petition was moved by Advocate Saad Rasool on Mr Barkat’s behalf with the latter currently imprisoned at Kot Lakhpat jail in Lahore.
Counsel argues Sohrab Barkat cannot be held liable for interviewee’s views
At the hearing, Deputy Attorney General Raja Muhammad Shafqat Abbasi contended that the charges levelled against Mr Barkat entailed 10 years’ imprisonment.
Justice Afghan, however, observed that the court even granted bail to those facing charges under Section 302 (punishment for intentional murder) of the Pakistan Penal Code, the maximum penalty for which was death.
He also noted that while the Peca law was being applied against those who criticised a “particular institution”, no action was being taken against those who pass “derogatory remarks” against the judiciary and its judges.
At that, the deputy attorney general said that the law should be applied even against those who maligned ordinary citizens. Eventually, as the court approved Mr Barkat’s bail, Justice Afghan made it clear that the journalist was not being acquitted and the “government can proceed against him”.
The court also enquired at what stage the trial currently was, following which the counsel for Mr Barkat argued that PTI activist Sanam Javed, whom his client had interviewed, had not been included in the investigation.
He also complained that Mr Barkat did not have access to the challan against him despite it having been furnished.
“Neither a charge sheet has been filed nor a formal trial has commenced,” he added.
The case against Mr Barkat was registered on a complaint filed by the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) for his alleged involvement in diminishing public trust in the state and for allegedly maligning state functionaries and dignitaries.
The complainant has alleged that his interview with Sanam had “derogatory remarks against state institutions”.
However, Mr Barkat’s plea against the LHC order said that his arrest was in “blatant violation” of earlier high court orders. The plea accused the prosecution of being “malicious” and associated it with a “pattern of harassment”. Also, the NCCIA/FIA never disclosed the existence of an FIR against the petitioner, which proved mala fide intent on their part, and the FIR attributed no specific unlawful act or speech to the petitioner, the plea said.
Published in Dawn, February 19th, 2026
