STATE through Advocate-General, Sindh, Karachi vs Mst. TAM BIBI

' SYED DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH, J..---The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Sindh, Karachi, dated 16-5-2001, passed in C.P. No,1096 of 2000.

2. Mr. Raja Qureshi, Advocate-General, Sindh made a statement before the Division Bench of the High Court of Sindh, Karachi, to the effect that the petitioner/Government decided to file civil petition for Leave to Appeal in this Court challenging the order of the High Court, dated 2-4-2001, with a request that further proceedings may be deferred till the expiry of the period of limitation.

The learned High Court rejected the aforesaid statement of the learned Advocate-General and directed that the Home Secretary or an Additional Secretary to appear in Court on 28-5-2001 to explain the position and show why further action should not be taken.

3. We have heard Mr. Suleman Habibullah, Additional Advocate-General, Sindh, who, inter alia, contended that the impugned order is not sustainable, as the penalty/compensation of Rs,5,000 per day for the detention of the detenue imposed by the learned High Court is against the law.

Admittedly, the order dated 8-8-2000 was agitated before this Court through Criminal Petition for Leave to Appeal No, 4786-K of 2000, which was disposed of vide order dated 11-12-2000, as not pressed. During the hearing of the petition it was found by the High Court that the detenue was kept in custody without lawful order and the order of detention under the Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance, 1960, was found to be ' in flagrant violation of the mandatory requirements of section 3 of the said Ordinance and Article 10 of the Constitution, and the detenue was allowed compensation at the rate of Rs,5,000 per day for a period of 32 days.

4. The High Court after going through the record rightly held ,that the detenue was arrested without lawful authority, therefore, the concerned officers were directed to pay compensation. The matter was also before this Court but the learned officer finding himself on weak vicket "did not press the criminal petition, which was disposed of accordingly. The signed statement of the learned Advocate-General, Sindh, was rightly rejected by the learned High Court.

5. We have considered the arguments of the learned Additional Advocate-General and perused the material placed on the record. The impugned order is based on sound and cogent reasons within the principles settled by this Court and is not open to exception. Resultantly, this petition is dismissed on merits and leave is refused.