LHC affirms Rangers' authority
The Lahore High Court (LHC) has rejected the impression that Pakistan Rangers have no authority to make arrests or detain the offenders under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 (CNSA 1997).
The development came as LHC's Justice Muhammad Amjad Rafiq dismissed the post-arrest bail of a drug peddler for allegedly having 1060 grams of heroin.
The arguments of counsel for petitioner Maqbool Ali, who is also the accused, revolved around the claim that Pakistan Rangers have no authority to arrest and detain the offenders under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 (CNSA 1997).
He further implored the court that the petitioner, being the owner in possession of adjacent lands, had once resisted interference with his property rights by the Rangers, who then retaliated by falsely implicating him in this case. He argued that a story was concocted, claiming two accused managed to run away from the crime scene, which was not believable, given the strength and arms available to the Rangers.
Officers from Pakistan Rangers were carrying a notification dated December 1, 2010, issued by the Government of Pakistan (Revenue Department) Federal Board of Revenue. This notification entrusted officers of Pakistan Rangers and the Frontier Corps (Balochistan, Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, including FATA) operating within their respective jurisdictions with the functions of Customs officers under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1969.
Such functions shall be limited to a 20-kilometre radius from the international borders. Thus, they claim the authority to inspect any suspected person within this area. A review of the notification shows that it was ordered to remain in force until June 31, 2011, and thereafter, it was to be reissued or extended subject to the satisfactory performance of the aforementioned departments. However, Rangers officers claim that it is still operative.
Justice Rafiq observed that the claim made by the counsel for the accused that the arrest by a sub-inspector of Pakistan Rangers had vitiated the entire proceedings could not be upheld for two substantive reasons. Firstly, with all just legal exceptions, officers of various categories within Pakistan Rangers are also authorized to exercise powers under the relevant provisions of the Customs Act, 1969, in light of the 2010 notification.
Secondly, after arresting, searching, and seizing narcotics, officers of Pakistan Rangers handed over the petitioner to the local police, a power that is available even to private individuals under Section 59 of the CrPC. Thus, no illegality has been observed, particularly since the case was investigated by the police.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
2 days ago
- Business Recorder
Ensure translation of evidence into Urdu simultaneously: LHC
LAHORE: The Lahore High Court (LHC) remarked that Urdu had been declared as the language of subordinate courts since 2015 but the same has not been implemented in Punjab till now. The court said the Supreme Court on September 8, 2015, had directed the government to implement Urdu as an official language but unfortunately no significant steps have been taken and up-till now evidence is being recorded in English in sessions courts. The court directed all the sessions' judges, additional sessions' judges, as well as, judges of special courts to ensure translation of the evidence of a witness recorded in English into Urdu simultaneously. The court passed this order in murder reference of Irfan alias Pomi after noting that the translation of the prosecution evidence and the statements of the accused have been made by the reader of the court after recording the whole evidence. The court said that law is very much clear on the point that the evidence should be taken down in the language of witnesses by the magistrate or judge himself or be recorded in his presence, hearing and superintendence. However, the translation of the evidence of a witness recorded in English should be translated into Urdu simultaneously at the same sitting, as well as, in the presence of witnesses, accused and the presiding officer, the court added. The court said this is necessary as if any ambiguity in the evidence recorded in English comes on the surface, the same can be removed in the light of translation of evidence in Urdu. The court said normally the witnesses during the trial depose in Urdu and the presiding officer, while transcribing the same in English, dictates to his stenographer and hence Urdu transcript of such deposition is not prepared. The court said this practice diminishes the very purpose of preparing and keeping Urdu translation of evidence recorded by the presiding officer in English. The court; therefore, directed the registrar to send copies of this judgment to all the sessions judges and judges of special courts, as well as, the secretary, ministry of law and justice Islamabad and the secretary ministry of law and parliamentary affairs Punjab for compliance. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
3 days ago
- Business Recorder
May 9 riot cases: LHC adjourns proceedings of IK's bail pleas
LAHORE: The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Thursday adjourned the proceedings of bail petitions filed by former prime minister Imran Khan in eight May 9 riot cases to June 23 after prosecutor concluded its arguments. The prosecutor also submitted detailed records of co-accused individuals in the Corps Commander House attack and other related cases. The court questioned the basis of treating Imran Khan differently from other accused who had already secured bail. The prosecutor submitting the details of the cases said an accused Sheikh Imtiaz Mahmood was granted pre-arrest bail in the Corps Commander House case on August 6, 2024, whereas Zain Qureshi's bail was dismissed. In the Askari Tower arson case, which includes murder charges, no accused has been granted bail so far, he told the court. He, however, responding to a court query said that Imran Khan being the PTI chairman held a commanding position at the time of the riots. He claimed that Imran Khan's conduct has been based on a pattern of hide and seek from the beginning. In response, Khan's lawyer argued that individuals cannot be held responsible for others' actions. He maintained that the presence of PTI supporters at protest sites due to their admiration for Imran Khan does not constitute a crime under Pakistan's Penal Code. He said the trial court will determine the actual facts. The court directed both the sides to conclude their arguments on next hearing and rose for the day. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Express Tribune
5 days ago
- Express Tribune
LHC grills PFA over 14-year delay in enforcing law
The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Tuesday expressed serious concern over the Punjab Food Authority's (PFA) failure to implement a key provision of its own governing law — the Punjab Food Authority Act 2011 — even 14 years after its enactment. During a hearing on a bail petition in a food-related FIR, Justice Ali Zia Bajwa questioned why the PFA had not constituted the mandatory investigation teams composed of food safety officers, as required under the law. "It has been 14 years since this law was enacted, and yet it has not been implemented. That is astonishing," remarked Justice Bajwa. He directly asked the Director General of the PFA why the provision had never been operationalized. The DG PFA failed to offer a satisfactory explanation, telling the court that although the law was drafted in accordance with European standards, it could not be implemented due to practical limitations. The department's law officer added that a shortage of food safety officers had prevented the formation of investigation teams. "If we constitute these teams, it would affect other critical operations of the department," he argued. Unimpressed with the justification, Justice Bajwa observed, "You are practically lifting your hands in helplessness. You admit you lack the capacity to implement the very law you are bound to enforce." Justice Bajwa further questioned the rationale behind passing such a law if its implementation was never feasible. "We will seek a response from the Chief Minister Punjab regarding this situation. Why was this act enacted if it could not be enforced in over a decade?" The court adjourned proceedings while seeking a comprehensive explanation from the provincial government.
