| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 5922 2024 SLD 5922 = 2024 PLD 211 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 36748 of 2022, decided on 1st February, 2023.
Before Shahid Karim, J
Waqas Ahmad Mir, Mian Tariq Hassan, Hassan Ali and Jahangir Dogar for Petitioner. Rehan Nawaz and Dr. Shahid Raza for
Respondent-SBP. Asad Ali Bajwa, D.A.G.
Writ Petition No. 36748 of 2022, decided on 1st February, 2023.
Before Shahid Karim, J
Waqas Ahmad Mir, Mian Tariq Hassan, Hassan Ali and Jahangir Dogar for Petitioner. Rehan Nawaz and Dr. Shahid Raza for
Respondent-SBP. Asad Ali Bajwa, D.A.G.
JAN MUHAMMAD TAYAB through Authorized Attorney---Petitioner
VERSUS
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Ministry of Law and Justice, Islamabad and 7 others---Respondents
Law: Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947
Section: VII,23C(4)
Law: Adjudication Proceedings and Appeal Rules, 1998
Section: 8
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 4,10A,199
Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (VII of 1947)-------S. 23C(4)---Adjudication Proceedings and Appeal Rules, 1998, R. 8--Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 4, 10-A & 199---Order of penalty imposed by the Adjudicating Officer of State Bank of Pakistan, assailing of---Appeal before the Foreign Exchange Regulation Appellate Board, admitting of---Deposit of surety of the equivalent amount of the penalty by the appellant---Pre-condition, vires of--Right to fair trial---Due process---Scope---Appellant invoked constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court as the Presiding Officer of the Appellate Board, while relying upon S. 23C (4) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 ("the Act, 1947"), had required the petitioner/ appellant to deposit before the Appellate Board a surety equivalent to the amount of penalty imposed upon him holding the same as a sine qua non for the appeal to be entertained and decided---Petitioner prayed for holding the provisions of S. 23C(4) to be unconstitutional on the ground that the same offended the rights of the petitioner/accused to be treated in accordance with law fairly and justly and his right to access of justice was also infringed---Validity---Provisions set out in S.23C(4) of the Act, 1947 provides that no appeal shall be admitted for hearing unless the appellant before the Appellate Board deposits in cash amount of penalty or at the discretion of the Appellate Board furnishes security equal in value to such amount of penalty, therefore, there is a complete prohibition enacted by subsection (4) of S. 23C of the Act 1947 to the hearing of the appeal unless the pre-condition is satisfied by an appellant, which is an infringement of the right which inheres in the petitioner to access to justice--One of the most important planks of the right of access to justice is the right to file at least one appeal against the order which affects the rights of a person---Right to file an appeal must be unimpeded and should not be circumscribed by a condition which surely takes away that right---Subsection (4) of S. 23C of the Act 1947 is one such provision which in fact is tantamount to taking away the right of the petitioner in not only filing…