SARDAR ALI vs Syed ASKAR ALI SHAH AND Other
The petitioner, detained under the Frontier Crimes Regulation in a Tribal Area, challenged the dismissal of his revision petition by the Commissioner, Peshawar Division, which was decided without a hearing. After the High Court dismissed his writ petition on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction over Tribal Areas, the petitioner sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal, identifying the core legal question as whether the Commissioner was obligated to provide the petitioner a hearing before adjudicating the revision petition. The Court emphasized the substantial importance of the matter, noting that fundamental rights to liberty and property were at stake, particularly given the potential lack of procedural precision in the underlying Jirga and Political Agent proceedings. Regarding a separate application for a stay of execution of a decree originating from the Tribal Area, the Court held that it lacked jurisdiction to interfere with such decrees. The Court affirmed that while it may review procedural fairness in administrative orders, it cannot intervene in the execution of decrees issued within Tribal Areas.
- Is the Commissioner required to grant a hearing to a petitioner before deciding a revision petition under the Frontier Crimes Regulation?
- Does the High Court have jurisdiction to interfere with the execution of a decree passed in a Tribal Area?
- Can a court grant a stay of execution for a decree issued within a Tribal Area?
- Frontier Crimes Regulation
ORDER
1. CORNELIUS, C. J.-The petitioner having been detained by an order under the Frontier Crimes Regulation, as a result of proceedings taken and orders made, in the Tribal Area, he moved a revision before the Commissioner, Peshawar, Division, which was decided without a hearing, at Peshawar. He applied to the Home Secretary for relief, but was informed that the application was not competent. He then moved a writ in the High Court, which has been refused by a Division Bench, on the single ground that the matter relates to a Tribal Area, and the Court has no jurisdiction. Leave is sought to appeal against this order.
2. The question is of substantial importance, as rights to liberty and property are involved, and the hearing, hitherto have been before a Jirga and thereafter before the Political Agent in open darbar, where precision in application of procedure and (in this case) the Turi Zuni Riwaj may well not have bee achieved. The latter point is not mentioned in the Political Agent's order.
3. We accordingly grant leave to appeal on the question whether the Commissioner should not have granted the petitioner a hearing before making an order on his revision petition. Security-Rs. 1,000.
4. An application is filed for stay of execution of a decree against the petitioner, in relation to which the order for detention has been made. The decree was made in the Tribal Area, and cannot be interfered with by the Courts. The application for stay of execution of the decree is accordingly refused.