Iqrar-ul-Hassan Bail Plea: Court Reserves Verdict in Social Media Case
KARACHI, PAKISTAN — WEB DESK: A sessions court in Karachi has reserved its verdict on journalist Iqrar-ul-Hassan’s bail application in a case involving allegations of posting anti-state content on social media.
During the hearing, the defence argued that Hassan had not promoted terrorism or glorified any banned organisation. His lawyer maintained that the legal provisions applied in the case were not justified by the alleged conduct.
The defence further argued that Hassan had only discussed the imposition of governor’s rule and had not committed the offences alleged against him.
The court reserved its decision after hearing the arguments. The Express Urdu report published on October 28, 2026, indicates that the decision was expected shortly.
Bail Application Previously Rejected
Hassan’s earlier post-arrest bail application was rejected by a judicial magistrate in Karachi. The court had cited concerns about the investigation and the potential risk of interference with digital evidence.
The case was registered by the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) over allegations involving content published through the journalist’s social media accounts. The allegations include the dissemination of anti-state, false and defamatory material.
Hassan has denied the allegations through arguments presented by his defence counsel, who has challenged the applicability of the charges.
The case involves provisions of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA), including sections relating to cyberterrorism and the dissemination of false information. The prosecution has maintained that further investigation and examination of digital evidence are necessary.
Court Decision Awaited
The reserved verdict will determine the outcome of Hassan’s latest bail application. Until the court announces its decision, his bail status remains unchanged, and he remains in judicial custody.
The proceedings have attracted public attention because of the intersection of digital speech, cybercrime legislation and freedom of expression.
The case remains ongoing, and the allegations should not be treated as established guilt unless determined through the legal process.
