livelawpk.com - The Physical Production of an accused before a Magistrate --

The Physical Production of an accused before a Magistrate or Court within 24 Hours of Arrest is a Fundamental Safeguard against Arbitrary Detention and Abuse of Power --- Such Remand Orders through video link without the Physical Presence of the Accused are Illegal --- Lahore High Court, Lahore

3 days, 7 hours
18

The Physical Production of an accused before a Magistrate or Court within 24 Hours of Arrest is a Fundamental Safeguard against Arbitrary Detention and Abuse of Power --- Such Remand Orders through video link without the Physical Presence of the Accused are Illegal --- Lahore High Court, Lahore

Islamabad 19-12-2024: In a significant judgment, the Lahore High Court quashed an order by the Punjab Home Department permitting video link remand for accused persons, ruling it unconstitutional and contrary to statutory requirements. The decision was delivered in the case of Imran Ahmad Khan Niazi Vs. Government of the Punjab and others (W.P. No. 45901/2024).

The Court emphasized that under Article 10(2) of the Constitution of Pakistan, Section 167 of the Cr.P.C., and Section 21E of the ATA, 1997, the physical production of an accused before a magistrate or Court within 24 hours of arrest is a fundamental safeguard against arbitrary detention and abuse of power. Video link remand is not permitted under these provisions.

The Home Department’s order allowing remand through video link was declared ultra vires. The Court noted that Section 21(2) of the ATA, cited by the department, applies only to trial-related measures and cannot override Section 21E, which explicitly mandates physical production for remand. The Court further held that the order lacked necessary Cabinet approval, rendering it void under the principles established in Mustafa Impex Vs. Govt. of Pakistan (PLD 2016 SC 808).

The Court highlighted that neither the ATA nor the Cr.P.C. includes provisions permitting video link for remand hearings, making any such administrative measure unauthorized and unconstitutional.

Referring to Article 9(3) of the ICCPR and other international conventions, the Court underscored the necessity of judicial oversight through physical production of detainees to ensure their rights and prevent custodial torture.

The judgment referenced several precedents, including Senator Asif Ali Zardari Vs. State (2000 MLD 921), which categorically affirmed that remand orders without the physical presence of the accused are illegal.

The Court recognized the increasing use of video conferencing in trials and evidence recording, as permitted by provisions such as Section 21(2) of the ATA. However, it clarified that such measures are restricted to trial procedures and cannot be extended to remand hearings. The Court also expressed concern that video link remand could fail to safeguard the accused against potential custodial torture, emphasizing the importance of in-person judicial scrutiny.

The Lahore High Court allowed the petition, quashing the Home Department’s order dated July 15, 2024, and reiterating that physical production of the accused for remand is mandatory under constitutional and statutory law. The ruling sets a clear precedent against unauthorized administrative actions and reinforces fundamental rights protections in criminal proceedings.