1. ' Learned Additional Advocate-General files a reply to the present application duly signed by Asad Ashraf Malik Capital City Police Officer, Karachi, alongwith an application for exemption from personal appearance of Mr. Malik. The application is accompanied by a Medical Certificate issued by Dr. Laved Arshad advising five days' complete bed rest to Mr. Malik from 27-7-2003 to 31-7-2003.
2. In his above reply the Capital City Police Officer, Karachi has denied having violated the Court's order. It is submitted that police force has been deployed at the venue of the Mela at the request of the plaintiffs to avoid any untoward incident and to provide protection to the visitors andfurther that such deployment was made by the S.H.O. Of the area Police Station, on his own and he has nothing to do with the same.
3. ' Mr. Syed Sarfraz Ahmed, learned counsel for the plaintiff, submits that the City Police under the order of Mr. Asad Ashraf Malik, has, since 21-5-2003, sealed the entrance to the venue of the Mela and has posted police force in and around the venue to affect such blockade. The T.P.O. And the S.H.O. Present state that Police has neither blocked the entrance to the venue nor has interfered with the affairs of the Mela. However, the photographs annexed to the present application, being C.M.A. No.4173/2003, clearly show that the entrance to the venue of the Mela has been blocked by fixing a Screen/Qunnat and police force has been posted there. Confronted with the above, the TPO and the S.H.O. Present in Court submit that the alleged action was not ordered by them. In circumstances and in order to determine as to whether the Capital City Police have violated the Court's orders dated 12-7-2003 and 16-7-2003, and, if so, which of the police officers are responsible for such a violation it is necessary to record evidence of the parties on the following issues:--
(1) Whether the Capital City Police has blocked the entrance to the Mela venue during the period between 21-7-2003 upto 28-7-2003 or any dates betwieen the said period, if so?
(2) Which of the officer/functionaries amongst the police officers/functionaries have ordered above blockade and/or are responsible, for affecting the same?
4. ' Learned counsel for the plaintiff, shall on the next date of hearing, produce the entire record pertaining to the Mela so as to show whether or not the Mela activities remained suspended since 21-7-2003 till date i.e. 27-7-2003. Adjourned to a date in the. Second week of August, 2003 on which date the parties shall record their evidence. The Police Authorities are warned not to violate the Court orders in future. The TPO and S.H.O. Present in Court today shall also be present on the next date of hearing. The plaintiff also is warned that absolutely no illegal, or illicit activity should take place under the umbrella of the Mela or else appropriate adverse shall be passed against him.
5. ' Since the period of three months for which the defendant No.1 granted permission for organizing the amusement Mela, is expiring on 13-8-2003, the interim order passed by this Court in this case shall continue to operate upto 13-8-2003 only.