| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 1623 2017 SLD 1623 2017 PLD 585 |
Sindh High Court
C.P. No. D-361 of 2017, decision & hearing Date : 22-02-2017
NADEEM AKHTAR, JUSTICE, FAHIM AHMED SIDDIQUI, JUSTICE
Shahab Sarki for Petitioner. Ch. Muhammad Farooq and Ms. Samina Iqbal for NADRA.
C.P. No. D-361 of 2017, decision & hearing Date : 22-02-2017
NADEEM AKHTAR, JUSTICE, FAHIM AHMED SIDDIQUI, JUSTICE
Shahab Sarki for Petitioner. Ch. Muhammad Farooq and Ms. Samina Iqbal for NADRA.
MUHAMMAD UMAR
VS
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN, THROUGH SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF INTERIOR, ISLAMABAD AND 2 OTHERS
Law: National Database and Registration Authority Ordinance, 2000
Section: 18,23
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
(a) National Database and Registration Authority Ordinance (VIII of 2000)---.--- ---.----Ss. 18 & 23---.---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---.---Power to 'block' computerized National Identity Card (CNIC) under S. 23 of National Database and Registration Authority Ordinance, 2000 ("the Ordinance")---.---Legality---.---"Impounding" of CNIC in terms of S.18 of the Ordinance---.---Procedure---.---No clear provision in the Ordinance authorized the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) to 'block' a CNIC---.---NADRA had no authority to block a CNIC after issuing a notice to the cardholder under S.23 of the Ordinance, however, instead of blocking, NADRA had the power to physically or digitally "impound" a CNIC in terms of S.18 of the Ordinance, after fulfilling requirement of a notice and granting opportunity of hearing to the cardholder---.---High Court gave directions laying down the procedure that had to be followed by NADRA before impounding person's CNIC. Blocking a person's Computerized National Identity Card (CNIC) was an extreme act as it amounted to depriving a citizen from his/her identity and depriving him to discharging his routine work. 'Blocking a CNIC' is negating the very identity of a person, which amounted to depriving him of all the necessities, and even imposed restrictions to his freedom of movement. If a person's identity was blocked on the ground of suspicion without giving him an opportunity of hearing, it amounted to a serious violation of his fundamental rights. Term 'blocking' was alien to the National Database and Registration Authority Ordinance, 2000 ("the Ordinance"). No clear provision in the Ordinance authorized the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) to 'block' a CNIC. Perusal of section 23 of the Ordinance clearly showed that NADRA had no authority to place an embargo whatsoever on a CNIC under the said section. Any person's CNIC could not be blocked after issuing him/her a notice under section 23 of the Ordinance. No doubt, by issuing a notice under section 23, NADRA may call any person who had given any information to furnish any proof regarding the information so given. Language of the statute…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492