PESHAWAR: Rejecting a plea of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government, the Peshawar High Court has declared legal an anti-terrorism court’s order to conduct the forensic examination of the videos purportedly related to the ransacking and torching of the building of Radio Pakistan in Peshawar in May 2023.
Justice Sahibzada Asadullah of a single-member bench directed the trial court (ATC) to proceed with the trial strictly in accordance with the law and determine the “evidentiary worth of the CCTV material and forensic report on their own merits” after giving the relevant parties an effective opportunity to contest the same.
Rejecting a criminal revision petition of the government against the ATC’s order to conduct forensic examination of the electronic material, the bench ruled that the ATC merely ordered the forensic examination of electronic material placed before it, a course that fell within the judicial powers available under the Code of Criminal Procedure.
In a 14-page detailed order, the court discussed different legal aspects of the matter and declared that for the reasons discussed above, the impugned order couldn’t be characterised as an order reopening, transferring or otherwise altering the police investigation.
High court directs ATC to determine ‘evidentiary value of CCTV material on merit’
“The questions of authenticity, integrity, admissibility and evidentiary value of the CCTV material and the forensic report remain open for determination by the trial court after providing due opportunity to all concerned. This court, therefore, finds no illegality, jurisdictional defect or material irregularity in the impugned order warranting interference in revisional jurisdiction,” it ruled.
The ATC, presently conducting trial of around 75 accused in the Radio Pakistan attack case, had accepted an application of the PBC’s station director on Dec 12, 2025, and had ordered forensic examination of the relevant videos and facial recognition of the accused through PFSA Lahore and Nadra, respectively.
The PBC’s station director had requested for examination of the videos through the PFSA Lahore for their genuineness, the presence and participation of individuals and facial recognition by Nadra for identification of the accused in the occurrence, which took place during protests triggered after arrest of former prime minister Imran Khan in May 2023.
The PBC alleged that the said footage was related to the attack on its building in Peshawar.
In light of the PFSA report, the investigating officer has now named KP Chief Minister Sohail Afridi, former provincial ministers Taimoor Saleem Jhagra and Kamran Bangash, Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf Peshawar district president Irfan Saleem and activist Amir Khan Chamkani, as the accused in the case.
Advocate Shabbir Hussain Gigyani appeared for the PBC, whereas additional advocate general Nomanul Haq Kakakhel, who has also been appointed as special prosecutor in the case, represented the government in the high court.
The KP government requested the bench to set aside the impugned order of the ATC and issue directives for the exclusion of the CCTV material from consideration.
The AAG contended that after submission of the report (challan) under Section 173 of CrPC and commencement of the trial, the trial court had no jurisdiction to entertain such material or to direct its forensic examination.
“The accused are not deprived of any legal safeguard by such an order. They remain entitled to question the chain of custody, the source and integrity of the electronic material, the methodology adopted by the forensic agency and the conclusions contained in its report,” it observed.
The court added that ultimately, it would remain for the trial court, after hearing all concerned, to determine what evidentiary weight, if any, was to be attached to the CCTV footage and the forensic report.
It declared that the mere fact that the material surfaced after submission of the challan didn’t render it inadmissible as a matter of law.
“In the present case, the CCTV material was not sought to be manufactured through a fresh investigation. Pakistan Broadcasting Corporation asserted that it was already in possession of a USB containing the relevant footage and placed the same before the trial court,” it pointed out.
The court further observed that the trial court considered it appropriate that the electronic material be subjected to forensic examination.
It added that such examination didn’t, by itself, establish the truth of the contents of the footage and that its purpose was to determine matters such as the source, extraction, preservation, continuity, integrity and possible alteration or manipulation of the electronic material.
The bench noted that Section 94 of CrPC empowered the court, where it considered the production of any document or other thing necessary or desirable for the purposes of any investigation, inquiry, trial or other proceeding, to require its production.
“The trial court did not direct the police to reopen the investigation, did not transfer the investigation to another officer or agency, did not appoint a new investigating officer, did not direct registration of a fresh FIR nor did it require submission of a fresh challan,” it observed.
The bench added that the court merely directed that a USB containing CCTV footage, which had been placed before it by PBC having a direct connection with the premises in question, be subjected to forensic examination.
It declared that the order was passed in exercise of the court’s own jurisdiction concerning material placed before it for purposes of the trial and cannot, merely because the material had not formed part of the original police investigation, be characterised as an assumption of the investigative functions of the police.
Published in Dawn, October 2nd, 2026
