The court noted that the alleged violations took place in 2019, before the act was criminalized in 2021, noting that the maximum penalty for the crime is six months, while Sani has been in custody for more than 13 months.
The ruling triggered a backlash from religious groups, who condemned the judgment and accused the Supreme Court of allowing Ahmadiyyas to spread their religion freely. In response, the Supreme Court issued a press release condemning the campaign against its judges and the judiciary and urged critics to file review petitions instead of engaging in public criticism.
Following the controversy, the Punjab government, represented by Solicitor General Ahmed Raza Gilani, filed a review petition, stating that the Supreme Court’s decision was based on incorrect assumptions about key facts. Several religious parties also filed review petitions; however, the Supreme Court limited their hearing rights, directing them to focus their arguments on the Constitution and Islamic legal principles.
Besides, the Supreme Court also issued notices to 10 religious institutions including the Islamic Ideology Council, seeking their opinions on issues related to Islamic law.
The Supreme Court partially accepted the review petition, reaffirming that the fundamental right to religious freedom is subject to the law, social peace and morality. However, the court rejected the petition seeking to overturn Mubarak Sani’s bail order.
The Supreme Court heard the appeal today
The Supreme Court of India is hearing today (Thursday) the Punjab government’s appeal against the court’s July 24 verdict in the Mubarak Sani case.
The appeal was filed by the Attorney General of Punjab on Saturday, asking the apex court to reconsider its February 6 order, which declared that the right to profess and exercise religion and freedom of religion guaranteed in the Constitution are subject to law, morality and public order.
The application was immediately scheduled for hearing before a three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa, Justice Irfan Saadat Khan and Justice Naeem Akhtar Affhan.
The petition highlights that some prominent clerics and members of parliament have urged the federal government to seek correction of certain parts of the judgment from the Supreme Court. Specifically, the three-page petition states that paragraph 49 needs to be deleted and corrected. The July 24 judgment ruled that the Federal Sharia Court’s 1985 judgment in Mujib-ul-Rahman v. Government of Pakistan and the Supreme Court’s 1993 ruling in Zaheer-ud-Din v. State were binding precedents from which the Supreme Court did not depart in its February 6 judgment.