Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLD 2542
Federal Constitution Court of Pakistan
C.P.L.A. Nos. 1199-K & 1200-K of 2025 (against the order dated 27.10.2025, passed by the High Court of Sindh at Karachi in Const. No. S-1139 of 2025)
Presented By: Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aamir Mansoob Qureshi, ASC Mr. K. A. Wahab, AOR (in both cases) On Court’s Notice : Mr. Jawad Dero, AG Sindh Syed Ghulam Shabbir Shah, PG Sindh Mr. Mohsin Hussain Shah, Asst. AG Sindh Mr. Asif Hyder Shah, Chief Secy. Sindh Mr. Javed Alam Odho, IGP Sindh Date of Hearing : 29.06.2026

Amjad Ahmed Sheikh (in CPLA 1199-K/25)   Asif Ali (in CPLA 1200-K/25)        ..…Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

Government of Sindh & others (in both cases)       …Respondent(s)

Law:

Section:

IN THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF PAKISTAN
 (Appellate Jurisdiction)
 

Summary ;

The Federal Constitutional Court heard appeals challenging orders passed by the High Court of Sindh concerning police reforms and the monitoring of police inquiries.

Key Issues

  • The petitioners argued that the High Court exceeded its constitutional jurisdiction by:
    • Issuing directions on internal police reforms.
    • Interfering with executive and administrative functions.
    • Monitoring inquiry proceedings in matters that were not directly before the Court.
  • The Prosecutor General, Sindh submitted that:
    • The High Court's guidelines on arrest and detention were largely copied from the 1996 Indian Supreme Court judgment D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal.
    • Since then, Pakistan—particularly Sindh—has enacted comprehensive and updated laws and policies governing arrests, detention, and police conduct, including:
      • Sindh Act No. XI of 2019
      • Police Order, 2002
      • Police Rules amendments (2021)
      • Torture and Custodial Death (Prevention and Punishment) Act, 2022
      • IGP's SOPs for Arrest (2021)
      • IGP directives dated 15 June 2022
    • Therefore, the 1996 Indian guidelines no longer have legal relevance in Pakistan.
  • The Advocate General, Sindh argued that the High Court committed judicial overreach by interfering in executive policy matters.

Court's Findings

The Federal Constitutional Court agreed with the petitioners and the Government of Sindh, holding that:

  • The High Court assumed suo motu powers that it does not possess under Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan.
  • The High Court improperly interfered with executive policy and police administration.
  • The observations and directions regarding police reforms and policy guidelines amounted to judicial overreach.

Final Decision

The Court:

🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register