The Custody Orders must be Specific, Justified, and Reviewed by the Sessions Judge as they involves the Liberty of an Individual --- Islamabad High Court, Islamabad
Islamabad 16-12-2024: The Islamabad High Court (IHC), led by Mr. Chief Justice Aamer Farooq and Ms. Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz, has annulled the Special Court-I’s decision to grant three-day physical custody of the accused in [FIR No. 1161/2024]. The case pertains to serious allegations under multiple sections of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC), including Sections 148, 149, 186, 353, and 506(ii), along with Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA), 1997.
The accused, represented by prominent lawyers, had challenged the Special Court’s order granting physical custody to the police. The Petitioners argued that the order was inconsistent with established principles laid down in previous rulings, particularly the Islamabad High Court (IHC) decision in The State through Advocate General, ICT Vs. Additional Sessions Judge and two others (2023 PCr.LJ 83).
The prosecution contended that the custody was essential for recoveries from the accused, who had been directly implicated in the FIR and assigned significant roles in the alleged offense.
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) found that the Special Court-I had failed to adhere to procedural requirements and established judicial principles, rendering its decision legally untenable. The Court emphasized several key points:
- Granting physical custody involves the liberty of an individual, necessitating careful judicial scrutiny. The Court underscored that such orders must be based on specific and justified police requests.
- The Court highlighted the procedural requirement to remit custody orders to the Sessions Judge for review and oversight. This procedural safeguard was ignored in the impugned order.
- The judgment criticized the Special Court-I for failing to comply with the Islamabad High Court (IHC) Rules and Orders, which govern the process of granting physical custody.
- The Islamabad High Court (IHC) referred to its earlier ruling in 2023 PCr.LJ 83, which lays down comprehensive principles for granting physical custody. The Special Court-I’s decision was found to be in violation of these established standards.
The Court concluded that the impugned order granting physical custody lacked the required application of judicial mind and did not comply with the requisite law. The IHC allowed the petition and set aside the Special Court-I’s order dated 29.10.2024, reaffirming its commitment to protecting procedural rights and personal liberty.
Powered by Froala Editor
