1980 P Cr (PLP)

Muhammad Ali Shaikh for Petitioner. Abdus Sattar Shaikh, Addl. A.‑G. for Respondent. Date of hearing: 22nd July, 1979. MUHAMMAD ZAHOORUL HAQ, J. This order will dispose of three Constitu tional Petitions Nos. D‑541, D‑323 and D‑324 of ]978, since the similar point of law is involved in all these petitions. Petitioner convict Sabir Ali in C. P. D‑541, convict AI‑Haj Umerdin in C. P. D‑323, convict Muhammad Yaqoob in C. P. D‑324 were convicted under the Hoarding and Black Marketing Order, 1956, on different dates by Summary Military Court, Hyderabad, which sentenced each of them to imprisonment for one year and fine. The petitioners do not contest the findings of the Summary Military Court, Hyderabad, but have challenged the very jurisdiction of the Court in taking cognizance of offence under section 3 of Hoarding and Black Marke ting Order, 1956 (hereinafter referred to P. O. 14 of 1956). It is contended that P. O. 14 of 1956; extends only to the Federal Area which was, at the time of its promulgation, the City of Karachi, and it does not extend to any other area. It is, therefore, urged that M. L. O. 7 of Zone C could be made applicable only to the offences committed within the City of Karachi and not beyond. Admittedly, offence alleged to have been committed by convicts, was committed in Hyderabad to which P. O. 14 A of 1956, does not extend. The convicts were not, therefore, lawfull convicted. This point has been elaborately considered in Petition No. D 1418/1978, by another Division Bench of this High Court which held as under:-- "The short but substantial objection raised by Mr. Muhammad Ali Shaikh, the learned counsel for the detenu, against the latter's convic tion and sentence was that the Hoarding and Black Marketing 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 detenu could not have been legally tried and convicted 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." Respectfully agreeing with that view, we would allow these petitions and set aside the convictions and sentences recorded by Summary Military Court, Hyderabad, against the convicts in these petitions, and direct that the fine imposed upon them, if paid, be refunded to them and all the goods seized from convicts which have been confiscated, be restored to them. The convicts have already been released from Jail as they have served the sentences. The petitions are, therefore allowed. Petitions accepted.