Case Details

Citation(s)
1968 SLG 17 1968 SLD 17 = 1968 PCRLJ 107
Sindh High Court
Criminal Revision Application No. 163 of 1967, decisionDated: 31st August 1967.
M. JAMIL ASGHAR, J

ARSALA KHAN --AppellantvsTHE STATE --Respondent

Law:

Section:

Karachi Control of Disorderly Persons Act (XXIX of 1952)----- ------Ss. 12 (2) (ix), (x), (xii), 16 Disorderly person Externment Interim state order   Can be passed by High Court pending final decision of appeal or revision Externee convicted for dealing in Charas and Opium in previous six cases but acquitted on appeal in all Externment of such person in subsequent case suspended till decision of revision petition. Shahmir Transport Co. Ltd. v. Member (Colonies and Trans�port), Board of Revenue P L D 1964 Lah. 710 rel. Nasiruddin for Petitioner. Mr. Haleem, Assistant Advocate General with Al e Raza for the State.ORDERArsala Khan petitioner was declared a dangerous disorderly person under section 12 (2) (ix), (x) and (xii) of Karachi Control of Disorderly Persons Act (XXIX of 1952) and was directed that he should furnish his finger prints and photographs to the police and be externed from Karachi District by the Tribunal and District Magistrate, Karachi. Against that order the petitioner has preferred this revision under section 16 of Karachi Control of Disorderly Persons Act. Along with the revision petition an application (Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 316 of 1967) was also filed for the suspension of the execution of the aforementioned order.2. On the 19th of July 1967, the revision petition was admitted and a notice was issued. A notice was also issued in the accom�panying Criminal Miscellaneous Application. At present I am only concerned with that application. It was contended by the learned Assistant Advocate General that under section 16 of the Karachi Control of Disorderly Persons Act, the powers of the High Court was restricted and no interim relief could be granted till the final decision of the revision. Section 16 of the Act reads as follows :�No appeal shall lie from any order made by the Tribunal, but in relation to any such order under section 4, or section 12, or section 15, the High Court may call for the record of the case, and if the Tribunal appear(a) to have exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law,(b) to have failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or(c) to have acted in the exercise of…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register