PESHAWAR, Nov 10: The Peshawar High Court on Monday questioned the validity of a presidential ordinance allowing bail to women accused in most of the criminal cases.

A single bench comprising Justice Said Maroof Khan, while hearing a bail petition filed by a woman charged with drug pushing, observed that the constitutional life of a presidential ordinance was four months and it should be clarified what was its status now. The petitioner, Ms Malghalra, was arrested by the local police on charges of carrying one kilogram of heroin.

The court adjourned hearing of the case till Nov 14 with the directives to the state and petitioner counsel to ascertain the validity of the said ordinance.

Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Ordinance, 1996 was promulgated by the president on July 8, 2006. The law amended Section 497 of the CrPC, dealing with bail matters, and ensured releasing of women on bail in most of the cases except three categories of offences -- terrorism, financial corruption and murder -- when such offence was punishable with death, imprisonment for life or ten years.

As the constitutional life of a presidential ordinance is four months, therefore, it was subsequently re-promulgated in Nov 2006, March 2007 and finally in July 2007. The petitioner’s counsel, Ms Farhana Marwat, contended that her client was entitled to bail under a presidential ordinance which guaranteed bail to women in various crimes.

The bench inquired from her whether the ordinance was re-promulgated and it was still in the field. The counsel argued that when the emergency was imposed on Nov 3, 2008, by General (retired) Pervez Musharraf the ordinances in the field were given protection in the Provisional Constitution Order.

Ms Marwat contended that as the ordinance was given protection through PCO, therefore, there was no further need of its re-promulgation.

The state counsel disputed her claim and stated that as far as he knew the ordinance had already lapsed when the PCO was promulgated. Moreover, he added that there was ambiguity about the ordinances given protection under the PCO as those had yet to be validated by the Parliament.

The counsel pointed out that the laws introduced during the emergency of 1999 till 2002 were given protection by inserting Article 270 AA in the Constitution through the 17th constitutional amendment. He added that no such article had been included in the constitution for validating the changes made during the emergency of 2007. The petitioner’s counsel contended that even on merit the petitioner could be released on bail as she was accused of possessing one kilogram of contraband.