Fraud Case
KARACHI: Journalist Farhan Mallick has been remanded to the custody of the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) for five days in connection with a fraud case. He was presented before Judicial Magistrate Malir-I, where the court approved his physical remand for further investigation.
Mallick was initially arrested on March 20 on charges related to spreading anti-state content. However, instead of being sent into judicial remand as ordered by the court in the first case registered against him last week, he was taken into custody again on Tuesday in a newly registered case.
Previously serving as the director of news at a private television channel, Mallick now operates his own YouTube channel. His arrest in the first case led to a four-day physical remand, which was set to conclude yesterday. However, just as he was due to be moved to judicial custody, the FIA presented a new case against him, leading to his continued detention.
According to FIA officials, a raid was conducted at a call center a day prior, where employees were allegedly engaged in fraudulent activities involving foreign nationals. The agency claimed that the arrested suspects disclosed Mallick’s involvement in operating the call center.
The newly filed FIR states that the suspects, identified as Syed Muhammad Atir Hussain and Hasan Najeeb Alam, along with others, were involved in stealing confidential financial data from foreign nationals.
The report further alleges that the stolen data, including credit card information, was obtained through spoofed calls and impersonation, and was subsequently used for fraudulent financial gains.
The FIA detailed the raid in the FIR, stating that the operation took place at an office named Sradtechies, located in Gulshan-e-Iqbal, Karachi. Employees were allegedly found making spoofed calls using Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP) software, impersonating officials from financial institutions.
They reportedly misled foreign nationals by claiming to be representatives from security departments of major banking networks, such as MasterCard and Visa. The suspects allegedly assured the victims that their loan interest rates and taxes could be reduced, thereby extracting sensitive financial credentials.
The FIA claims that during the investigation, one of the arrested suspects revealed Mallick’s direct involvement in supervising and supporting these fraudulent activities. Consequently, the journalist was presented before the court, which granted the FIA five more days of physical remand to continue its inquiry.
Outside the court, Mallick’s lawyer, Advocate Moiz Jafri, strongly criticized the FIA’s actions, accusing the agency of unlawfully detaining the journalist. He argued that despite a court order requiring Mallick’s transfer to judicial custody, the FIA continued to hold him without due process.
Jafri further pointed out that under the law, when an accused person is already in jail, authorities must notify jail officials before making an arrest in a new case. However, Mallick’s family had searched multiple prisons but could not locate him, suggesting procedural violations by the FIA.
According to Jafri, Mallick was supposed to be presented before the court for remand a day earlier, but the FIA intentionally delayed the process. He also questioned the timing of the new case, arguing that it was registered on the same day Mallick was scheduled to appear in court, suggesting that the charges were fabricated to justify his continued detention.
Mallick was originally taken into custody for alleged violations of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (Peca) and charges related to defamation. The FIA had filed an earlier case against him under multiple sections of Peca, along with Pakistan Penal Code sections 190 and 500, which deal with abetment and defamation, respectively.
The allegations against Mallick include disseminating anti-state content. His arrest has drawn attention to the controversial Peca law, which has recently been amended and widely criticized by journalist bodies across Pakistan. Media organizations and press freedom advocates have protested against the law, arguing that it is being used to suppress free speech and intimidate journalists.
