SC to hear govt's plea against suspension of Lakhvi's detention order tomorrow

A two-judge bench will hear the request


Hasnaat Malik January 05, 2015
A file photo of Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi. PHOTO: AFP

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Monday fixed the hearing of federal government’s appeal against suspension of detention order for Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi for January 6.

Lakhvi is the main accused in Mumbai attack case.

Earlier, on January 2, the federal government had requested the Supreme Court to bring forward to January 5 the hearing of the appeal.

However, it was decided that a two-judge bench will hear the appeal tomorrow.

Though Lakhvi was granted bail in December 2014 by an anti-terrorism court, the government moved to detain him under the Maintenance of Public Order (MPO). The Islamabad High Court then overturned the measure after challenging its legitimacy. The government had subsequently sought a suspension of the IHC’s order in the apex court.

The federation has already informed the apex court of its fears that the accused, along with other miscreants, might cause breach of peace. The possibility of any untoward incident cannot be ruled out, as Lakhvi is affiliated with a proscribed organisation, the petition said.

The appeal was moved on behalf of the interior secretary, district magistrate Islamabad capital territory and SSP Islamabad against the Islamabad High Court December 29 order regarding the suspension of the detention order for Lakhvi.

The government says that the respondent (Lakhvi) has misrepresented the contents of the detention order before the high court.

COMMENTS (1)

Azi | 9 years ago | Reply

I hope SC at least isn't full of sell outs. I am really getting irritated with these "will do it tomorrow" mantras. Why not today? Has the boiling blood of school massacre gone cold so quick? What do these judges do all day that always leave such important cases on later dates? Finish it up already!

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ