1. Granted.
2. The applicant claims himself to be quite another person than the one indicted. Since the plea is not reflected in the impugned order, we, at the outset, asked the learned counsel as to why the applicant did not seek appropriate orders regarding his identity and involvement in the proceedings from the learned Presiding Judge of the Special Court, functioning under the Suppression of Terrorist Activities Act. He answered, saying that such an application was filed but was not entertained. This, if true, is not permissible and no Court of law can refuse to entertain a case or an application in a case at the level of its office. Upon presentation, it is the obligation of the office to place the case or the application, as the case may be, for order before the concerned Judge whose duty, as would emerge from Zahuruddin v. Haji Husain, PLD 1991 Kar. 205, is to pass lawful orders pursuant thereto.
' Be that as it may, we have required the learned counsel for the applicant to prefer or repeat, as the case may be, such an application as above within a maximum period of seven days, which being done the learned presiding Judge would hear the applicant as well as the persecution and pass speaking orders within two weeks of the submission of such application, the delay, if any, being explainable to this Court in writing by the Presiding Judge.
' Disposed of.