| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2022 SLG 573 2022 SLD 573 2022 PLD 278 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 55467 of 2021, decided on 5th October, 2021. Date of hearing: 5th October, 2021.
JAWAD HASSAN, JUSTICE
Muhammad Yousaf Javaid Phaphra for Petitioner. Barrister Syed Ali Nouman Shah, Assistant Advocate General Punjab with Jaweria Maqbool, Additional Deputy Commissioner, Lahore for
Respondents.
Writ Petition No. 55467 of 2021, decided on 5th October, 2021. Date of hearing: 5th October, 2021.
JAWAD HASSAN, JUSTICE
Muhammad Yousaf Javaid Phaphra for Petitioner. Barrister Syed Ali Nouman Shah, Assistant Advocate General Punjab with Jaweria Maqbool, Additional Deputy Commissioner, Lahore for
Respondents.
AZHAR ABBAS HAIDERI
VS
GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB AND OTHERS
Law: Punjab Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance, 1960
Section: 5
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 20,199
(a) Punjab Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance (XXXI of 1960)--- ----S. 5---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 20 199---Freedom to profess religion and to manage religious institutions---Power to control suspected persons---Discretionary jurisdiction of Deputy Commissioner---Judicial review, non-availability of---Availability of alternate remedy---Scope---Grievance of the petitioner pertained to an order passed by the Deputy Commissioner whereby he was barred to enter in a district to take part in any majlis and making any speech there because according to the respondents the previously registered FIR against the petitioner for making derogatory/objectionable speech was clearly reflective of the fact that his speech could cause serious prejudice to the law and order of the society and pose a potential threat to the peace and tranquility of the area---Validity---Deputy Commissioner was competent under S. 5(1) of the Punjab Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance, 1960, to pass an order directing that a person shall not enter, reside or remain in any area as specified therein in order to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to public safety or public interest or the maintenance of public order---Executive functionaries had to be given autonomy of discretion with enough space to carry out their job without let or hindrance as it was essential as well as expedient that exercise of freedom was to be reasonably regulated on administrative considerations on the paramountcy of larger public interest because the public functionaries and executive authorities were the best judges to evaluate the nature and magnitude of threats so as to take all appropriate remedial measures/steps required to obviate impending disasters and these were not justiciable issues---Order passed by the Deputy Commissioner was well within his competence and defined domain---Constitutional petition was dismissed. Jibendra Kishore Achharyya Chowdhury and 58 others v. The Province of East Pakistan and Secretary, Finance and Revenue (Revenue) Departtnent, Government of East Pakistan PLD 1957 SC (Pak.) 9; Suo Motu Actions regarding suicide bomb attack of 22.09.2013 on the Church in Peshawar…
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