| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 2985 2016 SLD 2985 2016 PCRLJ 1773 |
Lahore High Court
W. P. No. 3625 of 2015, decided on 21st December, 2015.
IBAD-UR-REHMAN LODHI, JUSTICE AND RAJA SHAHID MEHMOOD ABBASI, JUSTICE
Mohammad Ilyas Siddiqui for Petitioner. Syed Raza Abbas Naqvi, Assistant Advocate-General Punjab with Allah Yar, Inspector-SHO and Abdul Majeed, S.I.
W. P. No. 3625 of 2015, decided on 21st December, 2015.
IBAD-UR-REHMAN LODHI, JUSTICE AND RAJA SHAHID MEHMOOD ABBASI, JUSTICE
Mohammad Ilyas Siddiqui for Petitioner. Syed Raza Abbas Naqvi, Assistant Advocate-General Punjab with Allah Yar, Inspector-SHO and Abdul Majeed, S.I.
RAJA WAHEED MEHFOOZ.
VS
SPECIAL JUDGE, ANTITERRORISM COURT-II, RAWALPINDI AND 2 others.
Law:
Section:
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---.--- ---.---S. 167---.---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S.21-E---.---Physical remand of accused---.---Scope---.---Local Police, on event of refusal of pre-arrest bail to accused persons, by the Trial Court, arrested accused persons and after completion of twenty four hours with the Police; produced accused before the Trial Court with request of their physical remand---.---Trial Court in two lines order, granted 15-days physical remand of accused persons to the Police---.---Principles provided in S.167, Cr.P.C., were the guidelines for the court before whom, accused were produced for physical remand; it was mandatory requirement within the view of S.167(3), Cr.P.C., that, the court authorizing under said section detention in the custody of the Police, would record its reasons for so doing---.---Remand was not to be granted mechanically without application of mind, rather it was to be granted only in case of real necessity; and also that the period of such remand was to be fixed with due regard to reasonable requirements---.---Remand order, passed by the court, did not reflect the fact that before handing over accused persons on physical remand to the Police, neither the Police record was consulted by the court, nor even the submission made on behalf of accused persons, were taken into consideration---.---Trial Court, was mistaken in understanding that while exercising its powers under S.21-E of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 was not required to give reasons for the order granting physical remand of accused persons, court's such interpretation, was completely in violation of the provision of S.21-E(3) of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997---.---Impugned order was set aside, accused persons were granted post-arrest interim protective bail, in order to enable them to approach the competent forum for their bail by moving application. Khairati Ram's case AIR 1931 Lah. 476; Rashid v. The State and 2 others PLD 1970 Lah. 389; Hafeezur Rehman v. The State PLD 1993 Pesh. 252 and Senator Asif Ali Zardari v. The State 2000 MLD 921 ref. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: IBAD-UR-REHMAN LODHI, JUSTICE:--------- The petitioners along with others, after having…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492