SHC dismisses state appeal against Mahrang's 2025 acquittal in sedition case

Read the original at Dawn ↗
Cite

Tanoli, I. (2026, October 19). SHC dismisses state appeal against Mahrang's 2025 acquittal in sedition case. Dawn. https://www.dawn.com/news/2038289/shc-dismisses-state-appeal-against-mahrangs-2025-acquittal-in-sedition-case

Dated from the outlet's own feed. Check the original for its byline.

Dawn · collected 2026-10-19 · by Ishaq Tanoli

Quick Summary

On Monday, the Sindh High Court dismissed an appeal filed by the provincial government challenging the acquittal of Baloch Yakjehti Committee leader Mahrang Baloch on terrorism and sedition charges. The case dates back to October 11, 2024, when she was booked for allegedly inciting people against security institutions in Quaidabad. Despite being acquitted by a Karachi anti-terrorism court over a year later, the state appealed this decision before the SHC in December 2025 but the bench, led by Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi and Justice Miran Muhammad Shah, found the appeal non-maintainable due to procedural issues.
Written locally by qwen2.5:14b on 2026-10-19, using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the same event (that is the story summary below).

AI analysis runs on qwen2.5:14b, locally

Story summary

On October 19, 2026, the Sindh High Court (SHC) dismissed the provincial government's appeal against the Baloch Yakjehti Committee (BYC) leader Mahrang Baloch's acquittal in a sedition case. The court declared the state’s appeal non-maintainable because the original complaint was filed by a private individual, not the state.

Mahrang had been charged with terrorism and sedition on October 11, 2024, after allegedly inciting people against security institutions. She was acquitted over a year later in December 2025 by a Karachi anti-terrorism court (ATC). The prosecution then challenged this acquittal before the SHC.

During the hearing, Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi and Justice Miran Muhammad Shah questioned why the state could appeal when the initial complaint came from an individual. Advocate Jibran Nasir represented Mahrang in her defense.

Written for “Sedition Case Acquittal Dismissed” on 2026-10-19, grounded in this article and the 0 other(s) covering the same event.
Why this leaning score
This article does not take a side on a contested political question, so it has no leaning score. That is an answer rather than a gap: a match report or a rescue can be warmly or critically written without being left or right, and scoring it anyway is how approval of a subject gets recorded as a political position.
No political leaning scored for article 90691 · logged 2026-10-19

Story

📰 Sedition Case Acquittal Dismissed
Politics · 1 article(s) covering the same event.

Compared with similar articles

Nothing to compare against. No article is close enough to this one for the pipeline to have linked or judged the pair.
How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
15
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
13%
2 of 15 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
not political
takes no side on a contested political question
Publisher signals
72/100
Dawn's corrections and hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.
Outlets on this story
1
Politics
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Analyzed 2026-10-19 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

Dawn · 1918 article(s) · 3 correction(s) detected
Running correction rate · 3 correction(s)

Who wrote this

Ishaq Tanoli
12 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 The court observed that the complainant in the first information report (FIR) was a private individual and questioned how the prosecution could file an appeal against the acquittal instead of the complainant.
🔮 The authority asserted that it could exercise “suo motu powers” to review and vary each of the separate tariff determinations previously established.
🔮 I will not allow either.
🔮 It said that since some allegations were levelled against Karachi Police chief Azad Khan and DIG Amir Farooqui — who is heading the current investigation team — during the testimony of the police surgeon, the commission would send questionnaires to both the senior police officers and asked the counsel for the aggrieved family, Jibran Nasir, to submit questions, if any, in this regard by Monday.
🔮 The three students are enrolled at DUHS under the Allama Mohammad Iqbal Scholarship Programme and are expected to graduate in April 2027.
🔮 During Monday’s proceedings, Dr Syed said that when she approached a police officer to point out loopholes in the first autopsy report, she was told that the police would be lenient during “interrogation” if she did not oppose the findings hinting at suicide.
🔮 Tanoli would be able to record his statement via Zoom/electronic modes, the commission’s order stated.
🔮 “I also said before the commission today that whoever is found involved in this will be punished,” the minister added.
🔮 To that, the state’s lawyer said, “A JIT will investigate the case from various angles while a commission can provide assistance in the investigation”.
Also by Ishaq Tanoli
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.
All 12 articles by Ishaq Tanoli →

Topics

ATC BYC Quetta SHC The Sindh High Court

Subjects

Mahrang PERSON · 8× ATC ORG · 4× SHC ORG · 3× BYC ORG · 2× Quetta GPE · 2× Baloch Yakjehti Committee ORG · 1× Karachi GPE · 1× Mahrang Baloch PERSON · 1× Quaidabad GPE · 1× The Sindh High Court ORG · 1×

Narrative

The FIR invoked Section 7 (punishment for acts of terrorism) of the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) 1997 as well as sections 124-A (sedition), 148 (rioting, armed with deadly weapon), 149 (every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object), 153-A (promotion of enmity between groups), 500 (punishment for defamation) and 505 (statement conducing to public mischief) of the Pakistan Penal Code.
framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-10-19
🔮 The court observed that the complainant in the first information report (FIR) was a private individual and questioned how the prosecution could file an appeal against the acquittal instead of the complainant.

Claims (15 extracted, 2 hedged)

The Sindh High Court (SHC) on Monday dismissed an appeal filed by the provincial government through the prosecutor general against the acquittal of Baloch Yakjehti Committee (BYC) leader Mahrang Baloch in a sedition case, declaring it non-maintainable. asserted
it → dismiss → case
Mahrang had been booked on terrorism and sedition charges by Malir district’s Quaidabad police on Oct 11, 2024 for allegedly inciting people by levelling “allegations against security institutions”. uncertain
Mahrang → book → institutions
Over a year later, she was acquitted by a Karachi anti-terrorism court (ATC). asserted
she → acquit → court
Subsequently, acting prosecutor general Muntazir Mehdi, on behalf of the state, had challenged the acquittal before the SHC in December 2025. asserted
Mehdi → act → December
On Monday, a two-judge SHC bench, headed by Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi and including Justice Miran Muhammad Shah, heard the appeal. asserted
bench → head → appeal
Advocate Jibran Nasir appeared before the court to represent Mahrang and advanced his arguments. asserted
Nasir → appear → arguments
The court observed that the complainant in the first information report (FIR) was a private individual and questioned how the prosecution could file an appeal against the acquittal instead of the complainant. uncertain
prosecution → observe → complainant
The prosecution claimed that the ATC had ignored facts while accepting Mahrang’s acquittal application. asserted
ATC → claim → application
It highlighted that the public prosecutor had informed the ATC that there was clear evidence against Mahrang and that such evidence was supposed to be presented during trial. asserted
evidence → highlight → trial
The prosecution further argued that deciding the acquittal application before the framing of charges was inappropriate. asserted
deciding → argue → charges
Mahrang, who is in Quetta prison in connection with other cases, had filed an acquittal application under Section 265-K of the Code of Criminal Procedure before ATC-V, which the court allowed. asserted
court → file → which
The FIR was registered on the complaint of a resident named Asad Ali Shams, who claimed that Mahrang was inciting violence in his area. asserted
Mahrang → register → area
The FIR invoked Section 7 (punishment for acts of terrorism) of the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) 1997 as well as sections 124-A (sedition), 148 (rioting, armed with deadly weapon), 149 (every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object), 153-A (promotion of enmity between groups), 500 (punishment for defamation) and 505 (statement conducing to public mischief) of the Pakistan Penal Code. asserted
FIR → invoke → Code
In June, a Quetta ATC handed two life sentences to Mahrang and another BYC leader in a case involving the death of a security personnel during a 2024 protest in Gwadar. asserted
ATC → hand → Gwadar
Mahrang’s challenge against her conviction is pending before the Balochistan High Court (BHC). asserted
challenge → pende → Court
💬Give feedback
🕘History 🎫Support