Scribd
Upload
47 views4 pages

2025LHC29

Uploaded by

Muhammad Noor
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
47 views4 pages

2025LHC29

Uploaded by

Muhammad Noor
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Form No.

HCJD/C-121
ORDER SHEET
IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

W.P. No. 485 of 2025


Miraj Zubair. Vs. RPO, etc.
Sr. No. of order Date of order of Order with signature of Judge, and that of Parties or counsel, where necessary
of proceeding proceeding
1 2 3
08.01.2025 Ms. Nosheen Ambar Bukhari and Syeda Zunaira Gillani,
Advocates for petitioner.
Barrister Hassan Khalid Ranjha, Additional Advocate General
with Hafeez S.I, Nawaz S.I. with Arif Ali in custody.
Syed Ali Raza Abbas, Assistant Attorney General for Pakistan.

The petition in hand is moved by Miraj Zubair


(petitioner) for the recovery and production of her husband,
namely, Arif Ali (detenue) statedly in illegal and unlawful
confinement of Station House Officer, P.S. Renala City District
Okara.
2. This petition was placed before the Court on
07.01.2025 and in accordance with canvassed grievance, Bailiff
was deputed for doing the needful towards the recovery of Arif
Ali (detenue). Accordingly, today Muhammad Qaiser Bailiff of
this Court submitted a report from which it divulged that he
visited the concerned police station on 07.01.2025 at about
06:20 p.m. and found Arif Ali detained in the police station.
According to Bailiff, upon a query raised by him, Arif Ali
(detenue) informed him that he was arrested from his hotel
situated in Sahiwal and is in police custody since 19.12.2024
without formal arrest. The detenue further agitated before the
Bailiff that despite being in custody of police since long, he has
not been produced before any court. The most important aspect,
which emerged from the Bailiff’s report, is to the effect that
although arrest of the detenue was recorded by the police in
Daily diary vide report No.9 at 08.40 a.m. on 07.01.2025 yet
W.P. No. 485 of 2025 2

the file of the case in which detenue had been arrested was not
produced by claiming the same to be in possession of the
Investigating Officer, who was not available at the police
station at the relevant time. The petitioner claims that she along
with her husband had also been taken into custody on
19.12.2024, however she had been released on 24.12.2024 but
her husband had not been released and today in support of her
claim she has produced an affidavit to that effect in the Court,
which has been retained in the file.
3. In compliance with notice of this Court issued vide
order dated 07.01.2025, Hafeez Ullah S.I./SHO has entered
appearance along with the detenue. On Court’s query, Hafeez
ullah S.I. stated that the detenue has been arrested in case FIR
No. 1608/2024 dated 24.11.2024 registered u/s 392 PPC and
red colour motorcycle No. OKM-412 King Hero Model 2017
snatched from the complainant of afore-referred FIR had been
recovered from the detenue, who had been arrested on
07.01.2025 and his identification parade was yet to be held.
However, it is not denied that by the time Bailiff raided the
police station detenue had not been produced before any court.
The aforementioned FIR has also been perused by this Court
and noticed that it was registered for an incident having
occurred on the intervening night of 24th and 25th November,
2024 for the theft of some costly equipment including snatching
of afore-referred motorcycle, for which the afore-mentioned
case was registered against unknown persons and admittedly
the detenue was not nominated therein even as suspect. The
report of Bailiff shows that he was informed by the Mohrar that
the detenue was implicated in the case through the
supplementary statement of complainant but no such
supplementary statement of complainant was produced before
him. Even the record of the recovery of the motorcycle from the
W.P. No. 485 of 2025 3

detenue was not produced before the Bailiff and in view thereof
possibility of subsequent preparation of record could not be
ruled out, hence despite production of police record before this
Court, definite conclusion could not be drawn on the basis of
material available before this Court that the afore-mentioned
motorcycle had been recovered from the detenue, which is
required to be established by recording of evidence. In case
reported as Sheikh Tariq versus Muhammad sharif, S.I./SHO,
Police Station Model Town, Lahore and another (1993 P Cr. L
J 2065), where recoveries against the detenue/accused was
found to be suspicious, the habeas corpus petition was allowed
and detenue was released on bail. Moreover, where nomination
of the accused through supplementary statement could not be
established from the record before the Bailiff of the Court, the
detenue was released on bail in case reported as Mst. Miran Mai
versus Station House Officer, CIA, Multan (PLD 2001 Lahore
459). Furthermore, detenue appears to have been detained
merely on the basis of suspicion and in such circumstances in
case reported as Ali Ahmed versus Muhammad Yakoob Almani,
Deputy Superintendent of Police, Qasimabad, Hyderabad and 5
others (PLD 1999 Karachi 134), the detenue despite recording
of his arrest was released on bail in the habeas corpus petition.
Needless to mention that this Court is competent to convert one
type of proceedings into another type of proceedings which
power also includes conversion of habeas corpus petition into
bail application where court while dealing the habeas corpus
petition came to the conclusion that detention of a person
required justification and/or such detention was found to be
illegal and unauthorized or had been effected on the ground of
suspicion only.
4. From the facts mentioned above, this Court is
convinced that the respondents had failed to justify the
W.P. No. 485 of 2025 4

dentention of the detenue in the police station and while


keeping in view the aforementioned affidavit sworn on oath
submitted by the petitioner, it convincingly emerges that prima
facie the detenue was not lawfully detained by the Station
House Officer in Police Station Renala City, District Okara,
thus this petition is converted into bail petition and detenue is
admitted to bail for next 07 days and is ordered to be set at
liberty forthwith in order to enable him to approach appropriate
court for getting his bail in case FIR No.1608/2024.
5. With this observation, the instant petition is
disposed of.

( Muzamil Akhtar Shabir)


Judge

Approved for reporting.

Judge

*M*Rizwan*

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy