Case Details

Citation(s)
1966 SLG 5190 = 1966 SLD 5190 = 1966 PLD 309
West Pakistan Lahore
Writ Petition No. 1950 of 1965, decided on 15th December 1965.
Presented By: Muhammad Gul and Muhammad Afzal Cheema, JJ
Mahmud Ali Qasuri, Raja Muhammad Anwar and M. B. Khizar Tamimi for Petitioner.   Sh. Ata Ullah Sajjad Additional Advocate-General for the State.

HUSSAIN ALI CHAGLA-Petitioner  

VERSUS

  DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, LAHORE AND ANOTHER-   Respondents

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1962

Section: 98

Law: Defence of Pakistan Ordinance, 1965

Section: 16(1)

  Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 98-Central statute cannot override provisions of Constitution nor exclude, abridge or otherwise curtail High Court's jurisdiction under Art. 98.   Muhammad Khan v. The Border Allotment Committee P L D 1965 S C 623 distinguished.   Defence of Pakistan Ordinance (XXIII of 1965), S. 16(1) Provisions cannot be construed to bar altogether High Courts jurisdiction under Art. 98, Constitution of Pakistan (1962) -Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 98.   The limiting provisions of section 16(1) of the Defence of Pakistan Ordinance, 1965 cannot in any mariner be construed to exclude or curtail the writ jurisdiction of the High Courts under Article 98 of the Constitution of Pakistan (1962) and the High Courts will step in to grant redress if any order purporting to be under the Ordinance or the Rules framed there under transgresses any provision of law or is otherwise mala fide.   Syed Abdur Rashid v. Pakistan P L D 1962 S C 42; Mian Jamal Shah v. The Member, Election Commission P L D 1966 S C 1; Lal Khan v. Crown P L D 1955 Lab. 215 and Haji Mehrban Ahmad v. Commissioner, Rawalpindi P L D .1955 Lab. 263 ref.   Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 98-Mala fides---Ascertaining truth or otherwise of allegations-Beyond scope of proceedings under Art. 98-Allegations of mala fide levelled not against authority, whose order impugned in writ petition, but against third party-Cannot raise inference of mala fide against such an authority.   Defence of Pakistan Rules, 1965, r. 32-"Satisfaction" of detaining authority-Proof of factum of satisfaction-Condition precedent for valid exercise of power under r. 32-Order of detention passed on fictitious and colorable "satisfaction" and without care or circumspection commensurate with gravity of cases affecting liberty of citizens-Cannot be sustained.   Cf. Harkishan Dass v. Emperor A I R 1944 Lab. 33; Liversidge v. Anderson (1941) 3 A E R 338; Emperor v. Despande A I R 1946 P C 123; Abdul Ghafoor v. The Crown P L D 1952 Lab. 624; In re: Narahari.Balji A I R 1949 Mad. 438 and Abul A'la Maudoodi v. Government of. West Pakistan P L…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register