LAHORE: The Lahore High Court-Multan bench on Wednesday suspended an inquiry initiated by the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) against journalist and YouTuber Imran Shafqat on a complaint filed by Federal Information Minister Attaullah Tarar.

At the outset of the hearing, Assistant Attorney General Muhammad Iqbal Sargana and inquiry officer Tahir Iqbal appeared on behalf of the federal government and the NCCIA, respectively, and submitted a five-page reply to the petition of the journalist.

The government’s lawyer argued that an inquiry could not be challenged before the high court at the preliminary stage.

He said the investigation was still at an initial stage and it could not yet be determined whether the matter fell within the territorial jurisdiction of the NCCIA’s Multan office or whether the minister’s complaint disclosed a cognisable or non-cognisable offence.

The inquiry officer also sought time to obtain a legal opinion on the question of the territorial jurisdiction of the agency.

On behalf of the petitioner, Advocate Mian Dawood contended that the NCCIA Multan did not have territorial jurisdiction over the matter.

However, he said the petitioner, a permanent resident of Lahore, had joined the inquiry as a law-abiding citizen.

Justice Khalid Ishaq observed when the agency itself was uncertain about its territorial jurisdiction, it should not proceed with the inquiry. He said the agency could obtain a legal opinion on the matter but the inquiry against the petitioner shall remain stayed till the next hearing.

The judge directed both sides to come up with arguments on Sept 28.

According to the petition, Information Minister Tarar had lodged the complaint against journalist Shafqat in Multan over alleged criticism of the government.

The journalist contended that the NCCIA had no jurisdiction to conduct an inquiry against him merely for criticising, commenting on or analysing the government.

He asked the court to declare the impugned inquiry unlawful and contrary to his fundamental rights.

Earlier, the court had restrained the NCCIA from taking any coercive measure against the petitioner with a direction to the latter to file his reply to a notice issued by the former.

Published in Dawn, August 13th, 2026