SARDAR MUHAMMAD ASLAM, C.J.--- Petitioner being wife of detenu has filed this writ petition, seeking direction for respondents to A produce the detenu in this Court. She has also requested for release of the detenu immediately, declaring the remand orders granted in the case of detenu as illegal and void.
2. Brief facts leading to this constitutional petition are that the detenu was running a mobile shop in the name and style of "Subhanallah Mobile Center and P.C.O.", situated at Adda Mureed Wala Tehsil Sumandri District Faisalabad since 2006, after his return from Saudi Arabia. Initially there was a partnership in the shop between the detenu and his brother namely Rana Ashfaq Ahmed, but in 2007 Rana Ashfaq Ahmed practically left his partnership in the said shop. The detenu remained in Saudi Arabia as an "Overseas Pakistani" in connection with employment for about 14 years w.e.f.
1992 to 2006 and was maintaining identity cards of his own and petitioner's. On 24-9-2008 when the detenu was present at his mobile shop, a large number of persons, some of whom were wearing police uniforms raided the detenu's - shop and arrested him. The raiding party also took away the mobile phones etc. From the shop, while sealing the shop. On 25-9-2005 a news item was published in "Daily Awaz Lahore", wherein arrest of the detenu and an other person was mentioned, connecting them with the Marriott Hotel bomb blast incident. After twenty days the detenu was able to contact the petitioner on mobile phone and told her that agencies are demanding arrest of his brother Rana Ishfaq Ahmed, who is allegedly required in connection with case F.I.R. No,127 of 2008 registered with Police Station Secretariat. Many other news items were also published in different newspapers showing connection of detenu with the Marriott Hotel bomb blast incident. A news item appeared in "Daily Nawa-iWaqt Lahore" on 25-10-2008, in which it was shown that detenu's remand had been granted by A.T.C. Rawalpindi for 7 days and next date of hearing will be 31-10-2008. The petitioner along with her father Abdul Latif reached at A.T.C.
Rawalpindi in order to meet the detenu, but failed. Thereafter, the petitioner engaged her counsel and on 8-112008, she along with her father and counsel went to Adiyala Jail Rawalpindi to meet her husband/detenu, but they were not allowed any access to the detenu. 18-11-2008 was fixed as date of hearing regarding judicial remand of the detenu before the respondent No,7, but the respondents did not produce the detenu before the respondent No,7 and respondent No,7 illegally granted judicial remand for further 10 days upto 28-11-2008, without production of detenu before him. On 18-11-2008 petitioner filed an application before respondent No,7 for permission to meet the detenu in jail, which was acceded to, but the jail authorities did not allow her for meeting with the detenu. Hence, this petition.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at some length and perused the record attached with this petition.
4. Detenu is an accused in case F.I.R. No,127, dated 20-9-2008 registered under sections 302, 324, 427, 436, 109, P.P.C. Read with section 3/4 of Explosive Act, and section 7 of Anti-Terrorism Act. His physical remand was obtained on 17-10-2008, which was granted with direction to produce ,him on 24-10-2008. The detenu was produced on the said date and his physical remand was again obtained with the request that recovery is likely to be effected and further investigation is required.
On 31-10-2008 physical remand was granted for further four days and he was sent to judicial lock- up on 4-11-2008, with direction to produce him on 18-11-2008. On 18-11-2008 the detenu was not produced, however, Superintendent Jail sent a letter that on account of accused's involvement in sectarian matters it is not possible to bring him out of jail. Request for an adjournment was made to submit challan, which was allowed and the case was adjourned to 28-11-2008.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has heavily placed reliance on Government of Sindh v. Raeesa Farooq 1994 SCM R 1283. The facts of the said precedent are distinguishable from the present case, as the detenu has been charged with sensitive offences and from examination of record prima facie it appears that sufficient material is available against him. The petitioner thus cannot safely urge that the detenu is under an illegal detention. Non-production of the detenu cannot be seen with favour. The learned Special Court Anti-Terrorism Rawalpindi is directed to see that accused are produced before it, before granting further judicial remand.
6. As far as meeting with the detenu by the petitioner (his wife) and her counsel, is concerned, the Deputy Superintendent Jail states that in such-like cases, permission is required from the Home Department, however, he undertakes that arrangement will be made for meeting of the petitioner and her lawyer with the detenu today.
7. In view of above, this petition is without force and is hereby dismissed.