ISLAMABAD: Nadia Baloch, the sister of Dr Mahrang Baloch, urged the Supreme Court on Wednesday to set aside the April 15 order of the Balochistan High Court that rejected the plea against her detention under the Maintenance of Public Order.
Dr Mahrang Baloch, a leader of Baloch Yakjehti Committee (BYC), is held at the Hudda District Prison, Quetta, pursuant to a March 22 detention order by the deputy commissioner under the Maintenance of Public Order.
Moved through senior counsel Faisal Siddiqi, the appeal pleaded that Mahrang Baloch had challenged her detention before the BHC, but the high court rejected her plea.
Now the appeal before the apex court contended that the high court order was contrary to the Constitution, law and facts.
The federal government through interior ministry, home and tribal affairs department of Balochistan, prosecutor general, inspector general of police, Federal Investigation Agency director general, Quetta deputy commissioner and the state have been named as respondents in the petition.
The petition alleged that her repeated unlawful detention and labelling her as a sympathiser of militants was a planned effort by the respondents to stop her from raising voice for missing persons. It apprised the court that her father and brother too were subjected to enforced disappearance in 2011 and 2017.
Along with the main appeal, a separate application was also filed before the Supreme Court, seeking suspension of the BHC order during the pendency of the present case.
Another petition challenging the extension of detention order is also expected to be filed before the SC in a day or two.
The main appeal pleaded that in December 2023, the “Baloch Long March”, organised and led by the detenue and other members of the BYC, was allegedly met with excessive and unlawful force.
The petition alleged that following a militant attack on a passenger train on March 11, there was a marked escalation in retaliatory measures by the state. On March 20, Bebarg Zehri, a BYC central committee member and his brother were abducted from their residence, the petition alleged, adding on March 19, their relative Saeeda Baloch was arrested and unlawfully detained for two days without any formal charge.
The appeal contended that the BHC erred by not ensuring the production of all the relevant material before it on which Balochistan MPO was passed so that the high court could have satisfied itself regarding reasonableness, arbitrariness and legality of the MPO.
It reminded that the SC held in 2003 that it was incumbent upon the detaining authority to place entire material before court on which basis the detention order was passed, regardless of any claim of privilege related to any document, as the high court was competent to decide the same and satisfy itself regarding the existence of the requisite condition of MPO of the detaining authority.
The court was apprised that the balance of convenience was in favour of the petitioner and irreparable loss would be caused to the petitioner unless the operation of the high court order was not suspended during the pendency of the present case.
The petitioner asserted that the deputy commissioner by issuing MPO order acted in clear excess of his statutory mandate, since it was issued unilaterally by him without securing the requisite approval from the chief minister.
Published in Dawn, June 12th, 2025
