Pakistan Case Law← Search
1978 P Cr. L J 83

Mst. NASIM AKHTAR vs THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, S ARGODHA AND ANOTHER

Citation1978 P Cr. L J 83
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Criminal Miscellaneous No, 269/H of 1977
Date1977-06-02
Judge(s)Abdul Shakurul Salam
ResultPetition allowed

' By means of this Constitutional petition an order of District Magistrate, Sargodha dated 25-5-1977 directing the detention of Rao Abdul Mannan is sought to be declared without lawful authority and of no legal effect.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the grounds of deten. Tion dated 25-5-1977 attached with the petition are that the detenu is habitual agitator, trouble creater, religious fanatic and holds meetings at his residence and mosques where he agitates people to take out processions, to go on strike and to use force against the law enforcing agencies. He also leads processions and agitates the processionist to law-breaking. That he promotes feelings of enmity and hatred between different classes of citizens. That he is acting and is further likely to act in a manner prejudicial to the public safety, interest and maintenance of peaceful conditions in Sargodha district". Learned counsel contends that ex facie the grounds of detention are extremely vague and cannot be made basis of the order of detention. He relies on The Government of East Pakistan v. Mrs. Rowshan Bijaya Shaukat All Khan (1), Malik Sohrab Khan v. The District Magistrate, Rawalpindi and 2 others (2), Ghulam Ahmad v. Punjab Province and another (3) and Nurur Rahman and others v. Hatam All Khan and others (4).

3. Learned counsel for the State has not been able to controvert the legal submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Record of the case has not been produced either.

4. In view of the generalizations stated in the grounds of detention, it is apparent that the liberty of a citizen which can only be curtailed on definite {{FOOT NOTE}}

(1) PLD 1966 SC 286 (2) PLD 1974 Lah. 214

(3) PLD 1976 Lah. 773 (4) 1969 P Cr. L J 392 {{FOOT NOTE}} Grounds specified in the law, the order of detention passed against the petitioner cannot be maintained. The cases refered by the learned counsel for the petitioner fully cover the case of the detenu. Therefore, the impugned order, being extremely vague and too general, is declared to have been passed withou lawful authority and of no legal effect. The petition is accepted with costs. The detenu shall be released forthwith if not wanted in any other case.

5. Copy dasti as prayed for on usual charges.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
Disclaimer·Privacy·Terms·Search