Law:

Section:

Karachi Control of Disorderly Persons Act (XXIX of 1952) S. 12(2)-Word "habitually'-To be taken to mean repeatedly or persistently-Habit implies commission of a number of similar acts Tribunal considering non-cognizable reports, proceedings under S. 107/110, Cr. P. C., and case under S. 447, P. P. C. against applicant and adjudging him disorderly person on basis of such evidence All reports except one relating to a period 3 years back, proceeding under S. 107/110 being compromised, and ease under S.447 still sub-judice-Applicant, held, could not be said to have been found guilty in such cases-Nor could applicant on basis of one solitary report (which alone was recent) be said to have habitually indulged in commission of crimes-Tribunal, held, acted illegally and its order not sustainable in law. Rasul Bux alias Dubal v. District Magistrate and Tribunal, Karachi 1970 P Cr. L J 935 ref. Date of hearing : 30th March 1971.   JUDGMENT This is a revision application under section 16 of the Karachi Control of Disorderly Persons Act, against the order passed by the learned District Magistrate and Tribunal, Karachi under section 12(2) of the Act. The D. S. P. Central (II), Karachi made a complaint before the District Magistrate and the Tribunal for taking action against the applicant tinder the Karachi Control of Disorderly Persons Act. This complaint was received by the learned District Magistrate on 4-5-68. In pursuance of this complaint proceedings were taken against the applicant and several witnesses were examined. The applicant denied the allegations and ascribed his implication due to enmity. He also examined some persons in defence. On the assessment -of the evidence the learned Tribunal came to the conclusion that the applicant was a disorderly person and, therefore, passed the impugned order dated 26th October 1968, directing that the name of the applicant be notified in the prescribed manner and he be placed on the list of disorderly persons and was released after due admonition. Aggrieved by this, the present revision application was filed. It was urged by the learned counsel for the applicant that the order of the learned Tribunal was not…