P L D 1980 Karachi 195 (PLP)

Z. A. CHANNA, J.-This constitutional petition seeks to assail the proceedings being taken under the Sind Crimes Control Act, 1975, against the petitioner's brother, Ibrahim alias Ibro, whom we will refer to as the detenu.

2. The proceedings against the detenu are pending before the learned S. D. M., City, Hyderabad, Who is the Tribunal constituted under the Sind Crimes Control Act, 1975. These proceedings have been taken upon an undated report submitted against the detenu by Police Inspector Syed Noor Hussain Shah. The said report recites that the detenu is an active criminal since long, commits all sorts of crimes, specially assault on public and deals in narcotics, gambling and Satta. It is further alleged in the said report that the detenu corrupts the young generation by initiating them in vices like gambling, Satta and drinking and always behaves riotously by giving them threats of killing them and is always in the habit of defying the law of the land in general and endangering the public peace. In support of these grave and serious allegations against the detenu, the only instances cited in which the detenu was involved, are 4 cases which were challaned in the Courts. The first case related to F.

1. R. No. 49/1976, which was under section 6 of the West Pakistan Prevention of Gambling Ordinance, 1961. According to the police report that case ended in conviction and the detenu was sentenced to R. 1. fur 6 months on 30-8-1975. The next case pertains to Crime No. 72/ 1976, which was also under section 6 of the Prevention of Gambling Ordinance. The third case relates to F. I. R. No. 51/1975, and is under section 43(3) of the Abkari Act. The last case pertains to F.1. R. No. 6/1978, of Phulcli Police Station and is also under section 43(3) of the Abkari Act. All these 3 cases are still pending trial, as stated in the police report. Mr. Ghulam Ali Agha, the learned counsel for the State, submitted that according to the factual report which has been sent to him by the police,, the detenu has since been acquitted in the case relating to F. I. R. No. 51;1975, under section 43(3) of the Abkari Act.

3. Although the police report. against the detenu does not state under what clause of section 14 of the Sind Crimes Control Act, 1975, action was to be taken against the detenu, we find that the only clauses under which the case of the detenu could fall are clauses (i), (ii) and (iv) of section

14. There is, however, no material to show that the detenu runs a gambling den or earns his livelihood from such den. His sole conviction is under, section 6 of the Prevention of Gambling Ordinance. That section makes is punishable to gamble in common gambling house. The detenu thus was convicted of gambling in a common gambling house and not running a gambling den or earning his livelihood from such den. His case also will not fall under clause (ii) or clause (iv) of section 14, since there is no tangible evidence to show that he runs a place where illicit intoxicants are consumed or that he frequents gambling dens. No doubt, the detenu has been challaned in 3 cases, one under the Prevention of Gambling Ordinance and two under the Abkari Act. However, in one of the case under the Abkati Act, he has been acquitted, while the other two cases a pending. It has been held in a number of cases by this Court, and last in the case of Muhammad Siddik v. The State (1), that the mere fact that a person is suspected in some offence or offences or even that he was challaned in respect of certain offences, would not be sufficient to bring his case within the purview of section

14. As such, the police report against the detenu does not make out a case against him for taking action under the Sind Crimes Control Act, 1975.

4. We would accordingly allow this petition with costs and quash the proceedings against the detenu. The detenu was granted bail by this Court. His bail bond stands discharged. M. A. K.????????? Proceedings quashed. (1) P L D 1979 Kar. 229