29 January 2004	Thursday	06 Zilhaj 1424

PESHAWAR, Jan 28: The Peshawar High Court on Wednesday dismissed awrit petition challenging the proposed Hisba Act and observed that it was premature.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan and Justice Dost Mohammad Khan observed after preliminary hearing that the bill was yet to be tabled in the NWFP Assembly and the cause for action would arise once the law was enacted.

The petitioner, former Peshawar Bar Association president Sher Afgan Khattak, had requested the court to restrain the provincial government from tabling the bill in the assembly. The petitioner argued that it was the policy of the Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal government to establish a parallel judicial system through the proposed law, which could be challenged before the high court.

Mr Khattak contended that the provincial government had prepared a draft of the proposed law and would soon table a bill in the assembly in this regard. The bench observed that there was a difference between a policy and a bill. It said the court could not interfere in government policies. However, the bench observed if a law was enacted and it violated the fundamental rights, then the court could declare it ultra vires to the Constitution.

Justice Jan observed that the government had announced that it had been consulting jurists and other segments of the society for improving the draft.The bench observed that even the draft was not final.

Justice Dost Mohammad observed that once the bill was tabled in theassembly, it would be debated before being passed. He observed that the petitioner could move the court if the bill was passed.

Mr Khattak contended that the proposed law was unconstitutional and the government should publicize the draft for public debate. The bench inquired from him if the bar council had passed any resolution against the proposed law. When Mr Khattak replied in negative, the court inquired what was the urgency for the petitioner to file the petition.

Mr Khattak replied that some component parties of the MMA, including the Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam (Sami) had opposed the proposed law and the masses had been exerting pressure on the government not to table the bill. Justice Dost Mohammad asked whether the petitioner also wanted to exert pressure on the government through his petition. The bench ruled that the petition was not maintainable and dismissed it.