CONTROL OF GOONDAS
(Punjab Control Of Goondas Ordinance XXXV Of 1959)
Validity. The ordinance is a valid piece of legislation. PLD 1969 SC 97. Ramzan Bibi.
West Pakistan Control of Goondas Ordinance (XXXV of 1959) ultra vires. Order under section 14(1)(d) can be made only after affording an opportunity of hearing to the goondas as required by section (2). Order passed without such opportunity is vitiated. A person cannot be externed from the entire district. (DB) PLD 1969 Lah. 767 Ch. Ghulam Muhammad.
Preventive. The ordinance is preventive and not punitive. (DB) PLD 1969 Lah. 182. Mst. Nusrat v. Dist. Tribunal etc.
Hearing not afforded. Goondas not afforded an opportunity of being heard before making an order under section 14(i)(d) as required by section 14(2). Such order held, illegal. (DB) PLD 1969 Lah. 767 Ch. Ghulam Muhammad.
Solitary act or more acts committed in course of a single transaction cannot form the basis for taking action under the ordinance. (DB) PLD 1975 Kar. 198 Muhammad Ishaq v. The Tribunal.
Involvement in many criminal cases. Petitioner proceeded against due to his involvement in a large number of criminal cases, being a bad character, a history-sheeter and a notorious smuggler. Petitioner acquitted in all criminal cases. District Magistrate declaring petitioner a goonda. Commissioner acting on irrelevant considerations and inadmissible evidence. Held, no adverse inference could be drawn against the petitioner for cases in which he was acquitted. Authorities exercised jurisdiction illegally in declaring the petitioner a goonda. Order set aside. 1972 P.Cr.LJ 374 Gul Muhammad.
Cases quoted as instance not looked into whether discharged or pending, before passing orders in proceedings under the Control of Goondas Ordinance, held, order of detention passed illegal. (DB) 1977 P.Cr.LJ 1018. Amir Hussain Gilani PLJ 1977 Lah. 487.
Previous conviction is necessary for constituting a basis for proceeding under Control of Goondas Ordinance. Proceedings based on cases which failed altogether are not maintainable under the ordinance. PLJ 1977 Lah. 487. Amir Hussain Gilani. 1977 P.Cr.LJ 1018.
No conviction. A person cannot be declared goonda merely because a large number of the cases of the type mentioned in clauses in (a) to (z) of section 13 were instituted against him, irrespective of the fact whether he was convicted. Some convictions are necessary before a person can be declared a goonda under section 13. PLJ 1976 Lah. 861. Muhammad Saleem PLD 1976 Lah. 156 = PLJ 1977 Lah. 487.
Pre-arrest bail under the ordinance. Despite specific provision contained in sections 6 and 8 of the Ordinance, held High Court is competent to grant bail to a person against whom non-bailable warrants had been issued under section 6 of West Pakistan Control of Goondas Ordinance. PLD 1967 Lah. 810 Muhammad Aslam.
Bail application under section 498, Cr.P.C. by a person proceeded against under sections 6 and 8 of the Ordinance is not competent (DB) 1968 P.Cr.LJ 1806 Muhammad Khan. This overruled PLD 1967 Lah. 810 Muhammad Aslam.
Control of Goondas Ordinance (West Pakistan Act XXXV of 1959) Act of the tribunal are subject to revision by the High Court under section 19 of the Ordinance, when the tribunal fails to exercise its jurisdiction or exercises its jurisdiction illegally. The tribunal imposing condition subsequently that the sureties must be from place of residence of the accused amounts to revision of the original order and hence illegal. PLD 1965 Kar. 61. Sher Muhammad.
Demand of excessive security is an abuse of jurisdiction. (DB) PLD 1969 Pesh. 167 A. Subar.
Person once declared a goonda cannot be declared a goonda again. Initiation of such proceedings a second time and consequent detention held illegal. 1972 P.Cr.LJ 1977 Abdul Waheed v. Addl. D.C. etc. PLD 1970 Lah. 388 rel.
Conviction set aside on appeal. Order declaring petitioner to be a goonda based on conviction set aside on appeal. Very basis of impugned order, held, not available. Order set aside. 1977 P.Cr.LJ 487. Haji Muhammad Yousaf.
Period of 2 years of bond expiring because High Court had suspended the impugned order. Held, no ground to invalidate the order. PLJ 1975 Cr.C.(Lah.) 432. Muhammad Sharif v. S.M.Q. Rizvi, etc.
A person cannot be externed from the entire district. (DB) PLD 1969 Lah. 767 Ch. Ghulam Muhammad.
The District Magistrate not competent to transfer case from one tribunal to another. Proceedings held invalid. Detenu set at liberty. 1969 P.Cr.LJ 727 Suleman.
Misuse of liberty and likely to suborn witnesses, held, is a valid ground for the detention of person under the Ordinance, section 8(2) (DB) PLD 1969 Lah. 182 Mst. Nusrat.
Reliance on irrelevant evidence, and not appreciating evidence according to recongised judicial principles, held, tribunal acted illegally and with material irregularity in the exercise of its jurisdiction. Order set aside in criminal revision. 1976 P.Cr.LJ 127. Ali Hussain v. D.M. Kar.
Provisions of section 6 (iii) not ejusdem generis with clauses (i) and (ii) of the section. (DB) PLD 1969 Lah. 182, Mst. Nusrat.
Irregularity in mode of report to the tribunal does not invalidate proceedings before the tribunal or the order passed by it. (DB) PLD 1976 Kar. 471, M.M.K.A. Zia v. D.M. etc.
Inquiry or examination of witness is not required by the tribunal before passing order of detention under section 8(2) of the Ordinance, only reasons are required to be recorded for doing so. (DB) PLD 1976 Kar. 471. Supra.
Particulars required under section 5(2)(b) not given, proceedings quashed. Application to High Court under section 19 of the ordinance. The practices mentioned according to section 5(2)(a) are listed as habitual thief and robber hazarduous to public, harasses witnesses, does evil acts, openly violates the law, and theft is his livelihood. Particulars required under section 5(2)(b) not given that is the instances with detail and time and place of such practice. Instead only a list of cases in which he was challaned to the Court was given. Held, provisions of section 5 not complied with, and the entire proceedings are manifestly illegal and without jurisdiction The tribunal was directed to cancel entire proceedings. 1976 P.Cr.LJ 650. Nizam-ud-Din.
Quashment grounds. Proceedings can be quashed only on the grounds when (a) the Court has no jurisdiction (b) case is barred under some law, (c) and the allegations even if accepted do not make out a case against the person proceeded against. Allegations against the public authorities are to be established on clear and convincing evidence. (DB) PLD 1969 Lah. 445. Muzaffar Khan.
Quashment Control of Goondas Ordinance. Police entering 5 reports in quick succession in a period of 12 days based on same allegations of teasing women; factor weighing with police not legal, legitimate and within ambit of the ordinance. Proceedings quashed. PLD 1977 Lah. 341. Rehmat Ali v. District Tribunal.
Admissions of petitioner alone not enough, when notice couched in general terms and containing not specific instances of practices complained against. Subject-matter of proceedings already found incorrect in earlier proceedings by the tribunal. Order set aside, under Control of Goondas Ordinance, 1959. 1977 P.Cr.LJ 619. Farooq Ahmad.
Costs under Control of Goondas Ordinance. Detenus proceeded under the Ordinance without any probable cause, unlawfully and with mala fides, officials responsible burdened with costs as compensation to the detenu wrongly proceeded against. (DB) 1977 P.Cr.LJ 1018. Amir Hussain Gilani. PLJ 1977 Lah. 487.