Islamabad: (PPF) On February 18, the Supreme Court granted post-arrest bail to journalist Sohrab Barkat in a case registered under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, ordering his release upon the submission of surety bonds worth Rs200,000. The bail order overturns a 21 January ruling by the Lahore High Court, which had previously rejected his plea. Barkat had been held in judicial custody at Kot Lakhpat Jail.

A two-member bench comprising Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb heard the petition filed by Advocate Saad Rasool. The case stems from a complaint lodged by the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency, alleging that Barkat had spread misinformation and diminished public trust in state institutions during an interview he conducted.

During proceedings, Deputy Attorney General Raja Muhammad Shafqat Abbasi argued that the offences carried a potential sentence of up to ten years. Justice Afghan noted that courts had granted bail even in cases under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code, which carries the death penalty. He further questioned why Peca was being applied selectively to those criticising a particular institution, while no action appeared to be taken against those making derogatory remarks about the judiciary.

The bench sought clarification on the status of the investigation and trial. Barkat’s counsel stated that Sanam Javed, the interviewee whose remarks formed the basis of the complaint, had not initially been included in the investigation. He added that although the challan had been submitted, the defence had not been provided access to it, no charge sheet had been filed, and formal trial proceedings had yet to begin. The investigating officer informed the court that a supplementary challan concerning Javed had since been filed.

In his plea, Barkat argued that his arrest violated earlier high court orders and that the FIR did not attribute any specific unlawful act to him. He contended that a journalist could not be held responsible for comments made by an interviewee and rejected suggestions that he owned the online platform where the interview was uploaded. The Supreme Court granted bail while emphasising that the order did not amount to an acquittal and that the government remained free to continue legal proceedings.