ALI ASGHAR SHAH vs THE STATE

ORDER

' Through this Criminal Revision Application, applicant has questioned the legality and propriety of the order dated 17-8-2005, passed by learned Judge Anti-Terrorism Hyderabad and Mirpurkhas Division at Hyderabad, whereby the application of the applicant/U.T.P. For grant of better class was rejected.

2. Applicant is in jail custody, having been involved in Crime No,111 of 2004 registered at Police Station Hussainabad, and is facing trial before Anti-Terrorism Court Hyderabad in Special Case No,6 of 2005.

3. He applied for grant of better class in jail on the ground that he was graduate, having passed B.A.

But his application was rejected by the trial Court.

4. It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that the Applicant is admittedly graduate having produced on record the certificate of B.A., but learned trial Judge declined to grant him better class in jail on the ground that he did not have the required social status of the family and further that he was unable to show the substantial income. It is contended that the order passed by learned trial Judge was illegal as a prisoner claiming better class is not required to qualify all the conditions .

5. Learned State counsel faint-heartedly opposed the application, but could not rebut the contentions raised on behalf of the applicant.

6. We have considered the submissions and perused the impugned order.

7. At the outset it may be pointed out that the order passed by the trial Court was misdirected and misconceived on two counts. Firstly; the trial Court misdirected itself to the provisions of rule 245 of the Pakistan Prisons Rules and secondly; it declined a better class to the applicant for the reasons that he does not possess social and financial status and that he has not demonstrated having sufficient income.

' As a matter of fact classification of undertrial prisoners is regulated by Rule 248 of the Pakistan Prisons Rules. Under the above rule there are only two classes of prisoners (a) better class (b) ordinary class. According to these provisions undertrial prisoners who by social status, education or habit of life have been accustomed to the superior mode of living may be granted better class.

' Being the citizens of a Republic which has constitutionally been declared Islamic State, welfare and enlightenment of the people whereof we are striving for, the State is supposed to and expected to begin to value acquisition of knowledge as a primary occupation of the society, and is under obligation to encourage and promote education and knowledge instead of encouraging amassing of wealth. The emphasis laid by Islam on acquiring knowledge is certainly unparalleled in the history. Thus the education should be given priority in comparison to the financial status as it is unignorable hard reality that the insatiable lust for acquiring limitless wealth, mostly by foul means and unquenchable desire for accumulating the same has torn into pieces moral fibre of the society. The object of enlightenment of society could be achieved by imparting more and more education and not by accumulation of wealth.

8. Admittedly, the applicant is graduate. No rule prescribing the minimum academic qualification to qualify for better class has been specifically pointed out. We believe that graduation is sufficient educational/academic qualification for grant of better class. More particularly the minimum qualification for a person for being elected to the Parliament as prescribed under the relevant laws has been fixed as graduation. Therefore, we declare that an under-trial prisoner having education up to the level of graduation will be entitled to be awarded better class, if he is not otherwise disqualified.

9. In the light of above discussion, the order passed by the trial Court is hereby set aside. The application is allowed. The Applicant be granted better class in the prison.