Detention and Repeated Implication In Multiple Cases

In the Lahore High Court, the petitioner, Sanam Javed, challenged her continued detention and involvement in multiple criminal cases under Sections 435 & 439 Cr.P.C., focusing on the order dated 14.06.2024, which granted her extended physical remand by the Special Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC), Gujranwala.

Key Issues:

Legality of Physical Remand: The petitioner was implicated based on the coerced statement of a co-accused/approver, Karim Hasan, made after a significant period in custody. The court scrutinized the validity of this remand, especially since no substantial incriminating evidence was presented beyond the coerced statement.

Jurisdictional Overreach: The petitioner's actions, leading to her arrest, occurred in Lahore. Despite this, she was implicated in Gujranwala, raising questions about the proper jurisdiction for her trial as per Sections 177 and 179 of the Cr.P.C.

Malafide Intent: The court noted a pattern of implicating the petitioner in successive cases, seemingly to prolong her detention, thus highlighting potential malafide intentions by the prosecution and investigating authorities.

Case Law: The court examined cases of Mushtaq Ahmad vs. The State (PLD 1966 SC 126), Dr. Waqar Hussain vs. The State (2000 SCMR 735), Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif vs. The State (PLD 2009 SC 814), Muhammad Sultan vs. Muhammad Raza (2020 SCMR 1200), Muhammad Bashir vs. SHO, Okara Cantt (PLD 2007 SC 539), and Ammad Yousaf vs. The State (PLD 2024 SC 273), which underscore the judiciary's role in correcting procedural and jurisdictional overreaches and safeguarding citizens' rights. .

Key Findings:

Improper Remand: The court criticized the mechanical manner in which physical remand was granted without substantial justification.

Violation of Fundamental Rights: The petitioner's repeated detentions violated Articles 4, 9, 10, 10-A, and 13 of the Constitution, which protect against unlawful detention and ensure fair trial rights.

Judicial Scrutiny: The court reaffirmed the need for judicial officers to exercise their duties with diligence, ensuring that the actions of the police and prosecution do not infringe upon citizens' constitutional rights.

Court’s Conclusion: The Lahore High Court found the continued detention and repeated implication of Sanam Javed in multiple cases to be driven by malafide intentions. The court noted that the evidence against her, primarily based on the coerced statement of the co-accused, was insufficient. The court also emphasized that the actions taken by the prosecution and police were not in line with constitutional guarantees of personal liberty and due process.

In conclusion, the Lahore High Court accepted the criminal revision petition, discharging Sanam Javed from the case and ordering her immediate release. The judgment also called for stricter compliance with judicial protocols by law enforcement and judicial officers, emphasizing the protection of fundamental rights.

Contact Us:

For expert legal services in matters of criminal revisions, contact AUJ LAWYERS LLP. Our experienced team is ready to provide comprehensive legal support tailored to your needs. Feel free to reach out to us for further assistance or consultation to safeguard your rights and interests.

We are here to help

Talk to our lawyers today. We tailor our services around your legal needs so that we can reach the desired outcome together.