Case Details

Citation(s)
1967 SLG 5387 = 1967 SLD 5387 = 1967 PLD 1
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 1976 of 1964, decided on 16th July 1966. Sher Ali  
Presented By: Anwarul Haq and Muhammad Afzal Cheema, JJ  
Sh. Muhammad Shafi (only on 14th July 1966), Mahmood Ali Qasuri assisted by Sh. Rafique Ahmad (15th and 16th July 1966), for Petitioners.   S. Nasiruddin, Advocate-General, West Pakistan assisted by Ch. Muhammad Saeed for
Respondents.

SHER ALI AND 3 OTHERS-Petitioners  

VERSUS

  DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MIANWALI,   COMMISSIONER, SARGODHA DIVISION, SARGODHA AND   (3)        SUPERINTENDENT,          DISTRICT     JAIL, SIALKOTRespondents  

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1962

Section: 98

Law: Frontier Crimes Regulation (III of 1901)

Section: 12

  Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 98 read with Art. 6. Deputy Fundamental Rights Nos. 1 & 15-Writ petition based on FundaDemur. mental Rights Nos. 1 & 15-Fundamental Right No. 15 suspended --by Presidential Proclamation of Emergency under Art. 30 (9)- Petition can proceed so far as Fundamental Right No. 1 is concerned-Conviction under Frontier Crimes Regulation (III of 1901), S. 12-Frontier Crimes Regulation, 1901 declared to be void by High Court Full Bench decision delivered while petition under Art. 98, Constitution of Pakistan (1962) was pending Petition, held, maintainable as questioning legality of detention under a void law.   Held, that the prohibition contained in the Presidential Orders made under Article 30 (9) of the Constitution was confined only to those Rights which had been specified therein. Fundamental Right No. 1 was not one of those Rights and accordingly it remained in force and could be invoked even during the continuance of the Emergency. There could be no question of the petition being joint with regard to Fundamental Rights Nos. I and 15 so as to preclude consideration of the inconsistency of the law with Fundamental Right No. 1. These were two distinct grounds of attack. Therefore, the petition could certainly proceed in so far as the enforcement of Fundamental Right No. 1 was concerned, irrespective of the fact that Fundamental Right No. 15 remained suspended.   At the time the petition was field the judgment of the full Bench in Malik Muhammad Usman's case had not been pro nounced, the petitioners had to make out a case regarding the F. C. R. being void on account of its inconsistency with Fundamental Rights Nos. 1 and 15, but with the pronouncement of the Full Bench, during the pendency of the petition, the position had materially changed, namely, that the law in question had in fact been declared to be void from the date of the enforcement of the Fundamental Rights on the 10th of January 1964, by the Constitution First Amendment Act. A direct result of the declaration made by the Full Bench was that, at least from the 10th of January 1964, up to the 16th of September 1965, (when some Fundamental…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register