1. ' NASIR ASLAM ZAHID, C.J.---Pursuant to the order passed yesterday, S.H.O. Bakhtawar Ali of Ferozabad Police Station has period the detenu Akber Khan, son of applicant.
2. ' According to the S.H.O. The detenu had been caught red-handed on 29-11-1992 at 9-40 p.m. In Society Area near Jheel Park. On search the detenu was found to be carrying one T.T. Pistol and some live ammunition. According to the S.H.O., at 10 p.m. FIR No, 612/92 was registered against the applicant under section 13-D of the Arms Ordinance, 1965. On 30-11-1992, remand was obtained till 5-12-1992 from one Mukhtiarkar who has been conferred power of First Class Magistrate and who sits in the office of D.C. East.
3. ' Apparently no investigation was required in this c. Se. According to the S.H.O., two Mashirs (one private and the other Head Constable) were taken to the Police Station the same night and their statements recorded. Apart from this, from 29-11-1992 till today no, other interrogation or investigation has been conducted in F.I.R. 612/1992. According to the S.H.O., -most of the time the detenu was with the Army at Station Headquarters near Taj Mahal. S.H.O. Informs that he has brought the Roznamcha and it shows that on 1-12-1992 ' 2-40 p.m. a telephone message was received from Captain Kaleem of 51 Lancers that the detenu should be taken to FIU at Station Headquarters and as such, with one A.S.I. Joseph of his Police Station, SHO sent the detenu to FIU at Station Headquarters. On 5-12-1992, according to the Roznamcha, 8-15 a.m. A.S.I. Joseph was sent with a mobile to take the detenu to the same Mukhiarkar/FCM for further remand as the original remand was expiring on 5-12-1992. Another remand was obtained, which in our view was not necessary, and remand was given till 12-12-1992 by the Mukhtiarkar/FCM, which in our view should not have been given by the Magistrate. According to the Roznamcha, the same day at 1-45 p.m., the detenu was returned to FIU and he was brought back at 4-15 p.m. Yesterday on 9-12-1992 in view of the orders of this Court for the production today.
4. ' It is further informed by the S.H.O. That in two cases, Crime No,296/1991 under section 13-D, Arms Ordinance, 1965 and 297/1991 under section 307/353, P.P.C. Of Artillary Maidan Police Station, in which crimes the detenu is named, challans had been submitted before the Special Court (STA)
5. No,2, Karachi and detenu was convicted in absentia and sentinced to 10 years' imprisonment and now he is to be produced before the Special Court.
6. ' On a question from the Court, the S.H.O. States that, in FIR No,612/1992, the detenu's further custody is not required.
7. As observed in the case of 13-D of Arms Ordinance, where the detenu had been caught red- handed there was no necessity of obtaining any remand and in any case there was no justification, legally or otherwise, of obtaining further remand from 5-12-1992 to 12-12-1992. It would appear that the remand was taken for purpose other than the purpose shown on paper for obtaining the second remand.
8. In the circumstances, we are cancelling the order of the remand passed by the Mukhtiarkar/FCM and directing that the detenu be taken from the Court to Central Prison, Karachi, where he should be kept in judicial custody and the Superintendent, Central Prison shield not allow the detenu to be removed from the Central Prison unless permission is taken from the Special Court, where his case be proceeding or for production before the Court where his cases may be pending. If the Police or any other authority wants his custody in any other case, permission be taken from the Special Court or from this Court in proper proceedings.
9. ' We have asked the Additional Registrar (Admn.) of this Court to inform the Superintendent, Central Prison, Karachi to either come himself or send some Assistant Superintendent of his office so that the custody of the detenu can be taken to Central Prison, Karachi.
10. ' For release of the detenu, the applicant/detenu may resort to other remedies that may be available to them under the law.
11. ' It may be observed here that, according to the detenu, .Who is present in person, that he was taken away by a large contingent of Army and Police from his house at about mid-night 15-20 days ago and he was immediately blind-folded and while he remained in Army custody he was always blindfolded and hands tied at the back and he was facing torture also but no interrogation took place. However, when he was with the police, he was not blind-folded.
12. ' Criminal Miscellaneous No,1173/92 stands disposed of accordingly.