Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 1211 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case The STate vs Administrative Judge, A

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 1211 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case The STate VS Administrative Judge, Anti-Terrorism Courts, Clifton, Karachi Ss. 7 & 19(1)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 63, 167 & 169---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 365-A---Abduction for ransom---Physical remand---Refusal---Scope---Physical remand of the accused was declined and Joint Investigation Team was constituted---Validity---Record showed that the son of the lady complainant was abducted---Police after obtaining search warrant from the Judicial Magistrate raided the house of the accused for search and arresting a suspected accused, who acted within the meaning of "terrorism" as defined under S.6 of the Act of 1997 by offering serious armed resistance causing bullet injuries to a DSP and a police constable---Police recovered heavy arms and ammunition, as per details mentioned in the remand reports, from the house of accused, who had previous criminal record---As such, sufficient grounds were available for believing that the accusation or information against the accused was well-founded for justifying his detention in police custody for further investigation by the police in the cases registered against him---It appeared from the perusal of the record that the material relating to the case(s) was transmitted by the Second Investigation Officer to the Administrative Judge but the latter declined police custody remand of the accused merely on the complaint of the accused regarding maltreatment---In such state of affairs, the proper course available to the Administrative Judge was remanding the accused for a short term to custody of police with direction to Investigating Officer to produce him before Medico-Legal Officer and in case there appeared from Medico-Legal Certificate that any bodily harm was caused to accused during remand, Administrative Judge was fully competent to take action in accordance with law against the Investigating Officer instead of remanding the accused to judicial custody to frustrate and defeat the investigation of heinous offences---Notable fact of the case was that none of the parties made any request for constitution of Joint Investigation Team to probe the case---Administrative Judge under the law was not vested with the power to pass such order---Under S.19(1) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 (Act of 1997), it was prerogative of the Government, if deemed necessary, to constitute Joint Investigation Team---Thus, the Administrative Judge had failed to appreciate the request of the second Investigating Officer for grant of police custody/remand of the accused, therefore, impugned orders granting remand of accused in judicial custody instead of police custody were illegal, arbitrary and against the law, which were likely to affect the investigation of the said crimes---By passing impugned order of constituting Joint Investigation Team, the Administrative Judge had exceeded his jurisdiction---In such circumstances, impugned orders were set-aside with direction to Investigation Officer of the cases to produce the custody of the accused before the Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court, for passing orders afresh in accordance with law---Criminal revision applications were allowed accordingly.

Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 1211 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case The STate vs Administrative Judge, Anti-Terrorism Courts, Clifton, Karachi Ss — 2025 PCrLJ 1211 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PCRLJ