Pakistan Case Law
1988 PCRLJ 2458

SH. MAQBOOL Versus DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, OKARA Amanat Ali Bukhari , Tanvir Ahmad Khan, Addl. A.-G.

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1988 PCRLJ 2458
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Writ Petition No. 3611 of 1988
Date1988-07-12
Judge(s)Muhammad Arif
ResultPetition accepted

Petitioner has been detained for a period of 45 days by District Magistrate, Okara vide order, dated 12‑6‑1988 in the purported exercise of powers under section 3 of the West Pakistan Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance, 1960, on the following grounds:

"That you are a notorious Rassagir/habitual offender of area of Police Station 'B' Division District Okara and your nefarious activities have caused fear and alarm to the general public. As such you have become a source of constant trouble to the society. You have the following record to your discredit:

(1) Case F.I.R. No. 17/87, dated 26‑2‑1987, under section Prohibition Order, P.S. 'B' Division Okara.

(2) Case F.I.R. No. 40/87, dated 26‑2‑1987 under section 13/20/65, Arms Ordinance P.S. 'B' Division Okara." legality whereof has been challenged in this writ petition by his son.

2. A copy of the petition was handed over to the learned Additional Advocate‑General, who, sought time for getting parawise comments from the respondent, wherein it is stated that four cases have been registered against the detenu viz.

(1) Case F.I.B. No. 37, dated 26‑2‑1987 under section Prohibition Ordinance, 1979 P.S. 'B' Division, Okara.

(2) Case F.I.R. No. 40, dated 26‑2‑1988 under section 13/20/65, Arms Ordinance P.S. 'A' Division, Okara.

(3) Case F.I.R. No. 59, dated 4‑2‑1984, under sections 307/332/353/224, 225/148/149, P.P.C., P.S. 'A' Division, Okara.

(4) Case F.I.R. No. 309, dated 19‑11‑1985. under sections 409/109/201/161, P.P.C., 14/.6/79 Islamic Law and 5/2/47 P.C.A., P.S.'A' Division Okara " and that he is a notorious narcotics dealer.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the grounds of detention furnished to the petitioner are at variance with the submissions made by the respondent in the parawise comments and the latter were not taken into consideration while issuing the detention order.

4. A juxtaposition examination of the grounds of detention set out in the detention order and the material referred to in the parawise comments demonstrates the irreconcilable difference between the two, in that, in the form it is stated that the detenu is a notorious Rassagir/habitual offender, and has two criminal cases to his discredit; whereas in the parawise comments, it is stated that he is involved in tour criminal cases, and is a notorious narcotics dealer. Furthermore, the particulars of the matter involve liberty of a citizen of the country.

5. For the aforegoing reasons, I have come to an irresistible conclusion that the impugned order suffers from incurable legal infirmity, thus is without lawful authority; and accordingly is hereby set aside; consequently, if the detenu is not required in any other; case, he should be set at liberty forthwith.

H.B.T./M‑951/L Petition accepted.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.