1989 P Cr (PLP)
Mst. MAHTOOM‑‑Petitioner Versus DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (SOUTH),
| Citation | 1989 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian, CJ. and Abdul Rahim Kazi, J |
| Parties | Mst. MAHTOOM‑‑Petitioner Versus DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (SOUTH), |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance (XXXI of 1960)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance (XXXI of 1960)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Ajmal Mian, CJ. and Abdul Rahim Kazi, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 P Cr (PLP) (Mst. MAHTOOM‑‑Petitioner Versus DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (SOUTH),). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sardar Muhammad Ishaque for Petitioner.
- A. A. Mohammad, A. A. G. for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 3‑‑Detenu admittedly was acquitted in five old criminal cases on basis of which he was detained‑‑Detention order against detenu, held, could not be sustained as it was not supported by a justifiable ground.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S. 3‑‑Detenu admittedly was acquitted in five old criminal cases on basis of which he was detained‑‑Detention order against detenu, held, could not be sustained as it was not supported by a justifiable ground. Sardar Muhammad Ishaque for Petitioner. A. A. Mohammad, A. A. G. for Respondents. AJMAL MIAN, C.J.‑‑ The petitioner who is the wife of detenu Mohammad Yousuf alias Bengali son of Nur Muhammad, has impugned the detention order, dated 16‑1‑1989 passed by respondent No. 1 under section 3(1) of the. Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance, 1960, detaining the detenu for a period of 30 days. The petitioner being the wife has filed the above petition.
2. Mr. Sardar Muhammad Ishaque, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that in the supporting grounds of the impugned order five old criminal cases pertaining to the years 1981 to 1986 have been mentioned in all of which the, detenu was acquitted. The above statement has not been controverted by the respondent. In this view of the matter, the impugned order cannot by sustained as it is not supported by a justifiable ground.
3. The petition is, therefore, allowed and the impugned order is declared as without lawful authority and of no legal effect. The detenu will be released forthwith unless he is required in some other case. H.B.T./ M‑664/K Petition allowed.