Pakistan’s Penal Code Section 295-C is today the most controversial and blood-soaked law in the country. Before examining this deadly Islamic law in detail, it is important to understand how these so-called religious offense laws developed in Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
Many people believe these laws were only introduced by the military dictator General Zia-ul-Haq in the 1980s. However, a deeper look reveals that these laws are rooted in a long history of Islamic intolerance, stretching back to the British colonial period in the Indian subcontinent.
The Pakistan Penal Code contains several sections related to religious offenses. These include use of religious titles, desecration of the Quran, wounding feelings of Muslims, and insulting the Muhammad. Each section has its own definition of crime and punishment.
1860 — British Penal Code Arrives in the Subcontinent
Before British rule, there was no clear codified law on blasphemy. The British introduced the Indian Penal Code. For the first time, Section 295 (desecration of religious places) and Section 298 (wounding religious feelings) were added.
1927 — The Rangila Rasul Case
In 1924, an Urdu book titled Rangila Rasul was published in Lahore. Written by Arya Samaj members as a response to Muslim attacks on Hindu scriptures, the book mocked the Muhammad’s wives personal sexual life and his crimes. Muslims were enraged. The publisher, Mahashe Rajpal, was taken to court but acquitted because the existing law was too weak.
On 6 April 1929, a Muslim named Ilm-ud-Din stabbed Rajpal to death. The British government responded by introducing Section 295-A, which criminalized insults to religious feelings by words, signs, or visible representation.
1953–1974 — Persecution of the Muslim Minority Group
In 1953, the movement (Tehreek-e-Khatm-e-Nubuwwat) reached its peak, especially in Punjab. Under the leadership of Maulana Maududi and other Muslim mullahs, massive riots erupted against the Muslim minority group. Hundreds were killed in Lahore. A judicial commission was formed, but its recommendations were ignored at the time.
In 1974, under heavy pressure from Islamic parties, Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto amended the Constitution and declared the Muslim minority group as non-Muslims.
Zia-ul-Haq Era — More Islamic Laws
After overthrowing Bhutto, General Zia-ul-Haq aggressively pushed Islamization to please the Sunni majority. He introduced Ordinance XX, adding Section 298-B and 298-C, which banned the Muslim minority group from using Islamic titles, calling themselves Muslims, or preaching their Islam. He also introduced Section 295-B, which prescribed life imprisonment for blasphemy the Quran.
1984–1986 — Death Penalty for Blasphemy
In 1984, advocate Muhammad Ismail Qureshi petitioned the Federal Shariat Court demanding the death penalty for blasphemy against the Islamic Prophet Muhammad. As a result, in 1986, a private bill was moved in Parliament demanding the death penalty for anyone who insults the Muhammad. The bill was passed with support from both Islamic Parliament and the Muslims. It was not merely Zia’s order — it had the backing of elected members and Islamic scholars.
1991 — Federal Shariah Court Decision
In 1991, the Federal Shariah Court, in response to Ismail Qureshi’s petition, declared that the only punishment for blasphemy against Muhammad is death, with no option of life imprisonment and no possibility of pardon. This remains the law till today.
The Christians of Pakistan continue to live in constant fear because of these Islamic blasphemy laws. False accusations, mob violence, and judicial persecution have turned their lives into a living hell. Churches are burned, homes are destroyed, and innocent Christians are murdered in broad daylight, often with the full support of local mosques and Mullahs. Not a single Muslim attacker is ever punished. This is not just a law — it is a weapon of Islamic supremacy that has made the lives of Pakistani Christians unbearable. Generation after generation, this cruel Islamic system continues to crush them, with no hope of justice or reform in sight.
Patton says
I love our great President Donald J. Trump. I voted for him three times He’s our best president since Reagan but it’s infuriating to hear him tell us these the POS Pakistanis or their dumb fucking president are “great people”. They are ALL POS. Every single one is a sub human moose scum. F-them.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
When he says things like this, then all his claims of being too good for his age in terms of mental acuity ring hollow. I had great respect for his judgement, but that has plummeted over the last year, staring w/ him browbeating India into ending its war w/ Pakistan
David Lakatos says
To defeat Islam,, you have to be as brutal as they are.
gravenimage says
We defeated the Nazis without becoming Fascists.
You don’t have to embrace the savagery of those you oppose–instead, stand up for your own civilized values. Just stop bringing them in, and start deporting the ones here.
David Lakatos says
Islam is a war plan.
Siddi Nasrani says
& don’t forget a ”Death Cult”.
OLD GUY says
Yes it is. The migration invasion of countries by islam brings young Islamic men into your country who will breed Islam from within in a couple generations.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Well, before 1860, that area was always under the Mughal empire, while Balochistan was under Safavid control. There were no Christians there obviously, while in Sind, Hindus were there, living like dhimmis like in the rest of the Mughal empire. In Punjab, there was a Sikh kingdom, which for the first time in the history of the region, reversed mohammedan control of the region. Of course, the Brits very helpfully destroyed it, so that Mohammedans regained control later. And we have people here who think that it was the Brits that ended mohammedan rule in India, when in fact, it was the Marathas and the Sikhs who did it
Anyway, after Nader Shah ransacked Delhi in 1761, the fact that the Mughal empire was effectively over, and just a city-state in suburbs of Delhi was clearly signaled to the rest of the subcontinent. That was followed by the Marathas conquering most of India, but even they didn’t go west of the Indus. As far as Punjab went, the Sikhs were on the warpath and so Punjab was a constant battlefield b/w mohammedans and Sikhs, while Sind was much like Gujarat right next to it. Since Hindus and muslims lived in separate communities and not next to each other, if a Hindu blasphemed islam, mohammedans either never heard about it, or if they did, were powerless to do much about it in the absense of a mohammedan ruler. Blasphemy became a thing once the Brits replaced the East India Company and tried the Condi Rice experiment of forcing Hindus and mohammedans to live together
࿗Infidel࿘ says
One thing missed above about this case: Rajpal didn’t write that book out of nowhere. It was done in retaliation for mohammedans mocking Hindu deities & beliefs. After appeals for them to stop fell on deaf ears, Rajpal wrote that book, and paid w/ his life. That said, that book is today available in India for Hindi readers who want to learn about Muhammad
Apparently, the people who ran the Raj had a mindset very similar to those running Britain today. But we’re supposed to admire them for abolishing “sutee” – a practice that was rarer than the number of traffic accidents in a remote area
James Lincoln says
Pakistan has nuclear weapons.
Are they really that more “reasonable” than what’s left of Iran’s “spiritual leaders” and their Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps???
David Lakatos says
Muslims think that they’re the moral high authority on planet earth. Which is completely absurd. What they really are is murderers, raspiest, pedophiles, misogynists, and slavers
࿗Infidel࿘ says
No. But try telling that to our foreign policy establishment, or even to our very stable genius of a POTUS
David Lakatos says
Islam is the most jack-religion on the planet.
Hit them where it will hurt them says
If you want to influence Pakistan, ban them from playing international cricket.
Pakistanis love cricket.
They would care about a ban on playing international cricket, in the same way a ban on playing imternational rugby union caused South Africa to reconsider its apartheid policies.
The West could impose a ban on Pakistan playing international cricket until Pakistan changes its policies on Islam.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Due to the fear of jihad attacks, Pakistan was virtually boycotted much of the last decade: they either toured other countries, or they “hosted” other countries in the Emirates. As a result, their standards have fallen, and they are barely a match for Bangladesh
Despite all that, their support for sharia or jihad hasn’t decreased. That said, I do think that international cricketers, particularly from non-muslim countries like Australia, England, South Africa… could and should avoid participating in the PSL, even if they didn’t get any IPL contracts
Also, the US is in no place to implement that. The countries calling the shots in the ICC are Australia, England and in this case, fortunately India!
Hit them where it will hurt them says
Australia is due to play 50-over One Day International (ODI) matches in Rawalpindi and Lahore, Pakistan on May 30, June 2 and 4.
Those matches should be cancelled by Australia unless Pakistan rescinds its blasphemy laws.
gravenimage says
Pakistan’s Draconian Blasphemy Law 295-C: A History of Blood and Islamic Supremacy
……………………………………………..
These barbarians are *not* our allies.
David Lakatos says
Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. Islam is a hate group, not a religion. Remove Islam religious status from America
zimriel says
“Muslim minority group” here means the Ahmadiya, I think.
David Lakatos says
I don’t care what name they call themselves. They’re all murdering Islamic Muhammadian jihad terrorists
David Lakatos says
Muhammad practiced and promoted, pedophilia. I don’t take a knee to a pedo pervert and call him a prophet.