| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2025 SLG 3591 2025 SLD 3591 = 2025 SHC 1992 |
Constitution Petition No.D-2741 of 2025
Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi; Mr. Justice Nisar Ahmed Bhanbhro.
through Mr. Muhammad Akbar Khan, Assistant Attorney General.
[Mushtaq Ahmed v. Federation of Pakistan and others]
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 4, 9,10-A, 15
Law: Passports Act, 1974
Section: 3,4
Law: Passports Rules, 2021
Section: 18, 21(1),22,22(4)
Law: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898
Section: 87 & 88
Summary
The petitioner, initially named in a NAB reference as an accused, was placed on several restrictive lists including the Exit Control List (ECL), Passport Control List (PCL), and Interpol List due to legal proceedings and allegations including illegal entry into Turkey. Although the petitioner surrendered voluntarily and complied with court proceedings, and despite an order from the Learned Trial Court directing removal of his name from the ECL and cancellation of red warrants, the petitioner’s name was not removed from the PCL and Interpol List.
The respondents maintained that the petitioner's name remained on the PCL due to an alleged illegal entry into Turkey, and that the normal removal process via the Review Committee under the Passports Rules, 2021 (PR 2021) requires a mandatory five-year period. The petitioner argued that the decision to place him on the PCL lacked lawful authority and due process, particularly since no formal orders were passed by the competent authority as required by the rules. He also contested the claim that he was deported by Turkey, asserting he voluntarily returned using ETDs issued by the Pakistani consulate.
After examination, the court found that the inclusion of the petitioner's name on the PCL and Interpol List was arbitrary, without lawful authority, and violative of his fundamental constitutional rights under Articles 4, 9, 10-A, and 15 regarding due process, liberty, fair trial, and freedom of movement. The Court held that the alternative remedy of review before the Review Committee was not adequate due to the conflict of interest inherent in the composition of the committee and because the authority exercised discretion arbitrarily. The Court directed removal of the petitioner’s name from the PCL and Interpol List and ordered the activation or reissuance of his passport within ten days. The petition was allowed.