March 31, 2026
By Xari Jalil
LAHORE
A petition filed before the Lahore High Court (LHC) has raised serious allegations of unlawful arrest, procedural irregularities, and misuse of cybercrime legislation in the case of a Canadian student, Hamza Ahmad Khan.
The petition, moved under Section 491 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.), challenges the legality of the petitioner’s detention and seeks post-arrest bail, naming the State and officials of the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) among the respondents.
Disputed arrest and timeline
Central to the petition is the claim that the petitioner was unlawfully picked up prior to the registration of the case. According to the record, the petitioner’s father had earlier lodged a separate complaint alleging his son’s abduction.
The petition contends that the subsequent First Information Report (FIR), registered under provisions of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA), 2016, was lodged after the petitioner had already been taken into custody, raising questions about the sequence of events and suggesting possible mala fide intent.
Legal counsel argues that this sequence indicates that the criminal case may have been constructed retrospectively to justify an already effected detention, amounting to an abuse of process.
Nature of Allegations
The FIR reportedly invokes provisions relating to unauthorized access to information systems, cyber harassment, and dissemination of allegedly harmful or false information. However, the petition maintains that the allegations are vague and lack specific attribution with there being no direct evidence linking the petitioner to the alleged acts. It also said that the invoked legal provisions had been misapplied
It is further argued that the case does not meet the threshold required for continued detention under the relevant provisions of law.
Grounds for bail and further inquiry
Invoking Section 497 of the Cr.P.C., the petition asserts that the case falls within the ambit of “further inquiry”, a legal standard under which bail is generally favored when evidence is inconclusive.
The defence contended that the offences cited do not fall within the prohibitory clause barring bail, that the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case and that the continued detention would amount to punishment prior to conviction.
Allegations of bad faith and abuse of law
The petition goes beyond procedural objections, alleging that the case reflects mala fide intent and misuse of authority. It argues that the legal process has been employed not for legitimate investigation but as a means of harassment and coercion.
Describing the detention as “illegal, unlawful, and without lawful authority,” the petition calls it a violation of settled legal principles governing arrest and investigation.
Constitutional violations cited
The petitioner has invoked multiple constitutional protections, including Article 9 (security of person and right to liberty), Article 10 (safeguards as to arrest and detention), and Article 14 (inviolability of dignity of man). The petition argues that these guarantees have been infringed through arbitrary detention and lack of due process.
The petitioner has requested the court to grant post-arrest bail, declare the detention unlawful, examine the legality of the FIR and subsequent proceedings and provide any other relief deemed appropriate in the interests of justice
Broader context
The case emerges amid ongoing scrutiny of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA), which has faced criticism from legal experts and rights advocates for its broad provisions and potential for misuse.
Observers note that the outcome of this petition before the Lahore High Court could have wider implications for how cybercrime laws are applied, particularly in relation to due process and individual liberties.
The matter is expected to come up for hearing in the coming days.