Find a Lawyer

Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 6-P of 1968, decided on 2nd April 1968.

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Peshawar Bench, dated 22nd November 1967, to Writ Petition No. 401 of 1967).

, Arts. 213 (S) & 98-Order of Political Agent in relation to a Tribal Area-jurisdiction of High Court barred under Art. 123(5)-Order, therefore, cannot be impugned under Art. 98--Frontier Crimes Regulation (III of 1901), S. 22. Article 223, sub-Article (5) of Constitution of Pakistan (1962), on a plain reading bars the exercise of jurisdiction by the High Court and the Supreme Court in relation to a Tribal Area, unless the Central Legislature, by law, provides otherwise. Where, therefore, a collective fine had been imposed on the tribes under section 22 of the Frontier Crimes Regulation, 1901 due to their recalcitrant behaviour in their own area in not surrendering or securing the surrender of the culprits who bad taken shelter in that area, it was held that the action of the Political Agent being in relation to a Tribal Area, his action could not be impugned before a High Court under Article 98 of the Constitution of Pakistan (1962).

Maqbool Illahi Malik, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Khawaja Mushtaq Ahmad, Attorney for Petitioners.

Nemo for Respondents.

Date of hearing: 2^nd April 1968.

A dacoity was committed near the National and Grindlays Bank, Peshawar Cantonment, on the 17th of October 1966. The culprits who became fugitives took shelter with the Sepah Illamgudar and Sikandar Khel Kuki Khels of Lashora and Gudar, in the territorial jurisdiction of the Khyber Agency. They were declared proclaimed offenders.

The elders of both the tribes mentioned above were repeatedly asked by the Political Agent, Khyber to secure the surrender of the proclaimed offenders which they failed to do in spite of their promises. The Political Agent, therefore, took action under section 22 of the F. C. R., amt sentenced the tribes to pay a collective fine of Rs. 15,000 each which was duly deposited by them. Ibis action was approved by the Commissioner who also dismissed the revision petition filed on behalf of the tribes by his order dated the 9th of May 1967.

The orders of the Political Agent and the Commissioner were challenged by a petition under Article 98 of the Constitution in the High Court of West Pakistan, Peshawar Beach which was dismissed on the short ground that the jurisdiction of the High Court did not run into the tribal territory, being barred under Article 223, sub-Article (5) of the Constitution. The present petition for leave to appeal is directed against that order.

The learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that as the offence had taken place in Peshawar and the Political Agent, Khyber has his office in Peshawar, where the order imposing the fine was made and where the money was also deposited, the matter fell within the jurisdiction of the High Court which has wrongly declined to exercise it.

Article 223 sub-Article (5) on a plain reading bars the exercise of jurisdiction by the High Court and the Supreme Court in relation to a tribal area, unless the central Legislature, by law provides otherwise. The fine on the tribes under section 225 F. C. R., has been imposed due to their recalcitrant behaviour in their own area in not surrendering or securing the surrender of the culprits who had taken shelter in that area. The fine was also realised from them in the tribal area although it was subsequently deposited in the office of the Political Agent at Peshawar. , The impugned action of the Political Agent, in our view, being in relation to and operation in a tribal area, the High Court was quite right in declining to give relief to the petitioners) for lack of jurisdiction.

We dismiss this petition.

Leave refused.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.