| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2025 SLG 4824 2025 SLD 4824 = 2025 LHC 6127 = (2026) 133 TAX 519 |
Intra-Court Appeal No.68139/2022
PRESENT; (MALIK JAVID IQBAL WAINS)JUDGE (ABID AZIZ SHEIKH) JUDGE
08-10-2025 Barrister Muhammad Umer Riaz, Omer Wahab, Muhammad Sohail Dar, Muhammad Akram Shaikh, Muhammad Imran Rasheed, Muhammad Mansha Sukhera, Ghulam Hussain Awan, Imran Muhammad Sarwar, Mudassar Shuja-ud-Din, Ch. Qamar-uz-Zaman, Abuzar Hussain, Hafeez-ur-Rehman Ch., Shahid Pervez Jami, Amjad Javaid Hashmi, Waseem Ahmad Malik, Muhammad Naeem Shah, Hashim Aslam Butt, S.M. Raheel, Saeed-ur-Rehman Dogar, Malik Asif Ahmad Nissoana, Irtaza Shaukat, Shahid Hafeez Dogar, Rana Muhammad Faisal, Rana Rehan, Rao Qasim Ali Khan and Ms. Saba Shaheen, Advocates for the appellants. M/s Rafey Altaf, Shahzad Ahmad Cheema, Malik Abdullah Raza, Muhammad Yahya Johar, Ch. Muhammad Zafar Iqbal, Sardar M.S. Tahir, Barrister Osama Zafar, Muhammad Nawas Amin, Barrister Muhammad Nauman Khan, Syed Zain-ul-Abidien, Tabassum Ali, Ms. Riaz Begum, and Sheikh Muhammad Ali, Advocates for the respondents. Mirza Nasar Ahmad, Additional Attorney-General for Pakistan. Ms. Deeba Tasnim Anwar, Assistant Attorney-General of Pakistan.
Abdul Saboor
VS
. Federation of Pakistan etc.
Law: Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972
Section: 3, 42, 425(1)
TAG LINE:
Where the sole and substantive challenge in a Writ Petition pertains to the vires of a statute, the bar under the proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 is inapplicable, and an ICA shall be maintainable. However, in the circumstances where both the impugned administrative action, such as call-up notices and FIRs and the constitutional validity of the law are simultaneously assailed, the determination of maintainability must firstly rest upon the dominant character of the challenge and the incidental nature of the relief sought, and secondly whether the grounds of challenge to administrative action would fall within the domain of the appellate or revisional authority. Applying these principles to the present cases, it clearly emerges that the principal challenge of the appellants is directed against the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the Anti-Money Laundering Act, 2010 and the subordinate legislation framed thereunder, whereas the call-up notices, inquiries, and FIRs (in absence of original or appellate order) have been impugned only as ancillary and the consequential to the alleged ultra vires nature of the impugned law purely on legal grounds, not following in domain of the appellate or revisional authority; hence, ICAs are maintainable.
Background
- The instant ICA (ICA No.68139/2022) along with 39 connected ICAs challenges a consolidated judgment dated 02.09.2022 in various Writ Petitions (WP No.16567/2021 and others) by a Single Judge-in-Chamber.
The petitions mainly challenged: