STATE OF THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN vs ZULFIQAR AHMED
The State of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan sought leave to appeal against a High Court judgment dated 14-6-2000, which allowed the respondent's constitutional petition against the placement of his name on the Exit Control List (ECL). The respondent, a businessman, was prevented from boarding a flight to Jeddah on 5-11-1998 because F.I.Rs were registered against him, including F.I.R. No. 2 of 1996 under Section 409 of the Pakistan Penal Code read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, which was subsequently quashed by the High Court. The core legal question concerned the justification and legality of placing a citizen's name on the Exit Control List in the absence of convincing reasons and adequate material, particularly when related criminal proceedings had been quashed. The Supreme Court held that matters relating to the liberty of citizens must be swiftly disposed of and upheld the High Court's exercise of discretion, observing that the impugned action lacked adequate material and strong justification. The petition for leave to appeal was accordingly dismissed.
- Whether placement of a citizen's name on the Exit Control List can be sustained in the absence of convincing reasons and adequate material?
- Do matters relating to the liberty of citizens require swift disposal by courts?
- Can the Supreme Court interfere with the High Court's exercise of discretion when neither unfair nor unreasonable?
- Section 409, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 5(2), Prevention of Corruption Act 1947
ORDER
' RANA BHAGWANDAS, J.--- Petitioner seeks leave to appeal against High Court judgment, dated 14- 6-2000 allowing Constitutional petition of the respondent against placement of his name on the Exit Control List.
2. Respondent is a businessm an. While he was boarding a flight to Jeddah for performing Umrah on 5-11-1998, he was not allowed to board the flight and informed that his name had been placed on Exit Control List as certain F.I.Rs, had been registered against him by Immigration and Passport Headquarters Office. He assailed the impugned action through a writ petition, which has been allowed by a Division Bench of the High Court on the ground that neither any convincing reason was assigned nor any ground put forward for justifying the impugned action. It was brought to the notice of the High Court that respondent was involved in F.I.R. No,2 of 1996 under section 409, P.P.C.
Read with section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 registered by F.I.A. State Bank Circle, Karachi, in respect of which respondent's counsel Mr. Muhammad Ilyas Khan placed before the High Court a certified copy of a judgment of the High Court quashing the said F.I.R. And the proceedings arising therefrom.
3. We are in complete agreement with the observation of the High Court that such matters relate to liberty of the citizens and have to be swiftly disposed of rather than to keep them pending for indefinite period. It is unfortunate to note that the Government agencies, who are the petitioners before this Court, did not bother even to communicate relevant material to the Deputy Attorney- General, who represented them before the High Court.
4. In the absence of any adequate material and strong reason, justifying the impugned action, we find no ground to interfere with the exercise of discretion by the High Court which was neither unfair nor unreasonable or against the settled principles of law.
5. Resultantly, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed.
Cited by 4 cases
- MUHAMMAD AMJAD vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN 2017 P Cr. L J 1266
- MUHAMMAD SADIQ vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Interior 2016 PLD Sindh 263
- JAVED AKBAR KHAN vs THE STATE and another 2016 PLD Peshawar 175
- Mian AYAZ ANWAR vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Interior 2010 PLD Lahore 230