LAHORE, July 15, 2025 — A Lahore sessions court has discharged an elderly man, Muhammad Sajid, from a controversial case linked to a viral video in which he was seen hurling inappropriate language against the Punjab Chief Minister. The decision has sparked discussions about freedom of expression, police conduct, and the application of habeas corpus laws in Pakistan’s justice system.
The incident, which unfolded in June 2024, began when a video surfaced on social media showing Sajid riding a motorcycle through heavy rain, vocally criticizing the Punjab CM. The clip quickly went viral, drawing mixed reactions from the public and leading to police action.
Background of the Viral Video Case
According to court documents reviewed by Dawn.com, Muhammad Sajid was arrested on July 14, 2025, following a first information report (FIR) lodged at Green Town police station. The FIR reportedly linked Sajid to using abusive language publicly, a charge carrying potential legal consequences under Pakistan’s laws concerning public order and defamation of government officials.
Sajid’s arrest ignited a wave of concern over civil liberties and the boundaries of lawful speech. “Viral videos have increasingly become a source of legal troubles for citizens in Pakistan,” notes a report by the Pakistan Institute of Legislative Development and Transparency (PILDAT). “They expose individuals to both public scrutiny and legal consequences, even in situations where the law is not clear-cut.”
Legal Proceedings and Habeas Corpus Petition
The legal trajectory of the case took a significant turn when Muhammad Umar, Sajid’s son, filed a habeas corpus petition in Lahore’s sessions court. In that petition, which was argued by Advocate Sameer Khan Khattak, Johar Town police was accused of illegally detaining Sajid during its two-day custody without presenting him to any magistrate.
In the petition, Khattak asserted that not only was there no registered case at the time of Sajid’s initial detention, but the police had also coerced him into recording apology videos. “Such forced apologies, particularly when circulated on social media, raise serious concerns about police overreach,” said Khattak during a court hearing.
Court Findings and Ruling
Presiding over the proceedings, Additional District and Sessions Judge Ghulam Farid scrutinized the police’s evidence. In a written order, the judge stated:
“There is no incriminating evidence that exists against the person charged which is to go to judicial remand. Hence, the request of the investigating officer has been turned down. The accused person is discharged from the instant case FIR, and the IO is ordered to release the person forthwith.”
The court also observed that the facts and circumstances of the case cast significant doubt on the police’s narrative, further supporting the decision to discharge Sajid.
According to Advocate Noman Sarwar Dogar, Sajid’s counsel, the charges were baseless. “My client was wrongfully nominated in the FIR,” Dogar said. “This is a classic example of how freedom of expression can be misconstrued as a criminal act.”
Police Conduct Under Scrutiny
Police conduct in cases involving viral videos has become a growing concern among legal experts and human rights advocates. Many analysts argue that law enforcement sometimes oversteps legal boundaries in response to political sensitivities.
As per a report by Human Rights Watch, “Police in Pakistan have occasionally used vaguely defined laws to suppress dissent or criticism of public officials, particularly on digital platforms.” The report emphasizes that while law enforcement has the duty to maintain public order, actions must be proportional and respect constitutional guarantees like freedom of speech.
Moreover, the circulation of apology videos — allegedly forced — has sparked public debate about whether such practices violate fundamental rights. “If a citizen is compelled to apologize under duress, it undermines both due process and individual dignity,” commented A professor of constitutional law Dr. Farah Zahid at the University of Lahore.
Political Sensitivities and Freedom of Speech
The Punjab Chief Minister, while not publicly commenting on this specific case, has previously cautioned against “the use of vulgar or threatening language against public office holders.” However, constitutional scholars highlight that criticism of political figures is protected speech under Pakistan’s Constitution, provided it does not incite violence or defame unjustly.
“Cases like Muhammad Sajid’s highlight the tension between maintaining respect for state institutions and safeguarding citizens’ rights to free expression,” said legal analyst Hassan Bukhari. “The law will at least have to draw a clear line to prevent abuse”
Public Reaction and Broader Implications
Public sentiment surrounding Sajid’s arrest has been mixed. Many citizens, particularly on social media, expressed sympathy for the elderly man, viewing his outburst as harmless venting during challenging times. Others believe that public discourse should remain civil, especially when referencing elected officials.
Social media influencers and journalists have questioned whether law enforcement’s response was proportionate. “If a viral rant should land one in jail and demand for apology?” tweeted journalist Sana Shahid. “Or is this about silencing criticism?”
Impact on Legal Precedents
The ruling could set significant precedent for future cases involving viral videos and criticism of political figures. “The discharge order underscores the judiciary’s commitment to evaluating evidence rather than yielding to political pressure,” said Advocate Sameer Khan Khattak.
