' JAWAID NAWAZ KHAN GANDAPUR, J.--- In this habeas corpus petition undpr Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Haji Muhammad Ishaq Shah, through his counsel Mr. Gauhar Zaman Khan Kundi, Advocate, has challenged the detention of his brother Gul Khan Shah under section 3(1) of the West Pakistan Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance of 1960 under the orders of District Magistrate, Lakki Marwat, dated 21-1-1999. It is prayed that declaring the said order of detention of detenu Gul Khan Shah as illegal, without jurisdiction and unlawful, he may be directed to be released forthwith.
2. Arguments of counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Advocate-General on behalf of the State/respondent have been heard.
3. Perusal of the order of detention, dated 21-1-1999, reveals that .Gull Khan Shah detent has been detained on the charges that he has acted and continues to act in a manner prejudicial to the public safety and maintenance of public order. Except for the bare order issued by the District Magistrate ordering detention of the detent, there is no material, worth the name, to justify the view of District Magistrate that the detent has been guilty of acting in a manner prejudicial to public safety and maintenance of peaceful condition in the District.
4. It is indeed high time to notice that in a well set democratic society the various functionaries of the State have least regard for the Constitutional guarantees available to the citizens of Pakistan and their liberty is jeopardized without least resorting to the legal requirements of the law under which they act. The Public Maintenance Ordinance, 1960 itself places an obligation on the District Magistrate directing detention of a citizen to supply to the detent the grounds and the statement of allegation for and under which he is directed to be kept in detention.
5. In Muhammad Ayaz Khan v. District Magistrate 1995 PCr.LJ 587 a Division Bench of this Court was pleased to hold that the grounds of detention communicated to detent must contain particulars of facts and should not be vague. In the case in hand the detent was directed to be detained in custody by filling in blanks relating to the name, parentage and residence on a printed form accusing the detent of acting in a manner prejudicial to public safety . And maintenance of public order. As pointed out earlier no evidence or any material has been placed before the Court on the basis of which the detent has been viewed by the District Magistrate as acting in the manner prejudicial to the public safety and maintenance of peaceful condition in the District. The term "prejudicial to public safety and maintenance of public order" in substance is so vast that unless specific charges on the strength of some material befitting judicial scrutiny holding detent acting in such a manner, if given judicial acknowledgement, would amount to placing the liberty and freedom of citizens at the whims of a functionary who by just leveling such charges may place restraints even on the lawful activities of a person by just ordering his detention for he has the power to see order. Ordering detention of a citizen on the general terminology of acting "in a manner prejudicial to public safety and maintenance of public order" without specifying the actual guilt or crime rendering a person to be detained must be held to be a vague order. In the authority referred to above it was held that ground of detention communicated to the detent must contain particulars of facts and should not be vague for vagueness in grounds infringes statutory/Constitutional requirements. Limiting the liberties of the human beings, who in the words of Caliph Ilnd (Hazrat Umar, May God be pleased with him) (sic) and that too on vague allegations, in our view, is not only unconstitutional but offends against the basic principles of the teachings of Islam of which we are the subjects in general. In Raja Nek Muhammad v. District Magistrate, Abbottabad and others 1998 PCr.LJ 612 a Division Bench of this Court had held:-- "The prerequisite condition for issuance of an order under the aforesaid section is that the Government has to satisfy that a person is likely to act in a manner prejudicial to the public safety or maintenance of public order and then to direct the arrest and detention of that person for a specified period. It implies that satisfaction of the Government with regard to the conduct of the person likely to act in a prejudicial manner must be objective in nature and not subjective so as to allow the Executive Authorities to act on their own fancies. There must be sufficient material before the Authority to act upon it so as to justify passing an order of detention."
6. Since the basic requirements of the well-settled law on the subject have been nakedly violated, without further adjudicating upon the matter, we declare and hold the detention of the detent as without lawful authority and in an unlawful manner.
7. Accordingly, by accepting this petition we direct that Haji Gull Khan Shah, detent shall be forthwith released if not required in any other case.