PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court on Thursday declared illegal the detention of a housing society’s office-bearer under the Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance and ordered his release if he is not wanted in any other case.

A bench comprising Justice Mazhar Alam Miankhel and Justice Qaisar Rasheed accepted the petition of vice president of Officer Cooperative Housing Society, Ziarat Kaka Sahib Road Nihayat Ali against his detention on the order of Nowshera’s deputy commissioner.

On March 12, the deputy commissioner had ordered the petitioner’s detention for one month.

The district administration alleged that the petitioner had launched the housing society without fulfilling legal requirements.

The bench set aside the deputy commissioner’s order and asked him to ensure the petitioner’s immediate release if he is not wanted in any other case.

It, however, ruled that the administration could file an FIR against the petitioner if he was involved in criminal activities, without taking shelter under the umbrella of West Pakistan Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance, 1961.

The bench observed that it expected that in future, the deputy commissioner would pass detention orders strictly in accordance with the law.

The respondents in the petition were Nowshera deputy commissioner, district police officer and SHO of Nowshera cantonment police station.

Mian Mohibullah Kakakhel and Shahab Khattak, lawyers for the petitioner, said the deputy commissioner had overstepped his powers under the MPO.

They said even if the administration charged the petitioner with any illegal activity, he could not be detained under the MPO and therefore, the detention of his client was in fact misuse of authority by him.

Mian Mohibullah said the order of the deputy commissioner was nothing less than infringement of a right of liberty of a person provided and protected by the Constitution.

He said the petitioner had already spent 15 days behind bars.

Additional advocate general Waqar Ahmad said the order was issued by the deputy commissioner on reports about the illegal launch of the petitioner’s housing society.

The bench ruled that if, at all, the petitioner committed any such offences, then the legal course available to the law-enforcement agencies would be to book him for relevant offence instead of going for preventive detention.

It added that the petitioner’s detention under the MPO could not be justified on the ground of his association with the said society.

The bench ruled that the detention order was totally against the mandate of the law, which, in the circumstances, was against the fundamental rights of a citizen provided under the Constitution.