Z. A. CHANNA , J.-This constitutional petition challenges the legality of the trial and the conviction of the detenu, Din Muhammad son of Ghulam Muhammad, by a Summary Military Court at Hyderabad, under Article 3 of the Hoarding and Black Market Order, 1956.
The facts of the case, for the purposes of this petition, shortly stated, are that on I 1-10-1978, detenu Din Muhammad was arrested under sections 3 and 6 of the Sind Foodstuffs (Control) Act, 1958, for allegedly being in possession of 9 bags of Atta, said to be Rationed Atta. An F. I. R. Was accordingly registered against him at the Market Police Station, Hyderabad, on 27-10-1978. A challan was thereafter submitted against him before the Summary Military Court at Hyderabad by reason of Martial Law Order No. 7 of the Martial Law Administrator. Zone 'C', which provides that cases relating to Black Market and hoarding as defined in the Hoarding and Black Market Order, 1956, shall be tried by the Military Courts. The Summary Military Court, by its order dated 31-10-1978, convicted the detenu of an offence under section 3 of the aforesaid order and sentenced him to imprison--ment for 12 months and also to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000.
3. The short but substantial objection raised by Mr. Muhammad Ali Shaikh, the learned counsel for the detenu, against the latter's conviction and sentence was that the Hoarding and Black Market Order, 1956, which was promulgated by the President under Article 211 of the Constitution of 1956, is applicable only to Karachi, which at the time of Promulgation of the said Order was the Federal Capital, and that as the said order does not extend to Hyderabad, the detenus could not have been legally tried and convict of an offence under that Order. The objection of the learned counsel is unassailable. The learned Additional Advocate-General, who appears for the State, frankly conceded that as the aforesaid order is applicable only to Karachi, he cannot support the trial and the conviction of the detenu for an action allegedly taken at Hyderabad City.
4. We would accordingly set aside the conviction and the sentence recorded against the detenu by the Summary Military Court and direct that he should be set at liberty if not required in any other case. The fine imposed on him by the Summary Military Court, if paid, should be refunded to him.