BISMA NAUREEN/AMEER JEHAN vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Finance Pakistan, Islamabad

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

BISMA NAUREEN/AMEER JEHAN VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Finance Pakistan, Islamabad arts. 15, 16, 17, 19, 25 & 199---Right to freedom of movement, assembly, association, speech and equality before the law---"aurat March" (literally translating to Women's March), holding of---Fundamental rights of women---Petitioner/lady invoked constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court seeking that "aurat" /Women's March be banned---Contention of the petitioner was that certain slogans , like "mera jism, meri marzi" , raised by the participants of the Women's March would run contrary to socio-cultural norms---Held, that there was nothing objectionable in the particular slogan cited by the petitioner , as the same merely sought to convey the sense of agency and self-efficacy that a woman was entitled to have and exercise over her person and actions, for whilst "feminism" and feminists might sometimes be viewed with opprobrium by those of a patriarchal or conservative bent of mind, for women' rights were human rights, and in a country based on democratic values, women were entitled to and need to be extended the full measure of freedoms enshrined under the law and Constitution---articles 15, 16, 17 and 19 of the Constitution guaranteed the fundamental rights to freedom of movement, assembly, association and speech to all citizens, while art. 25 of the Constitution ensured equality before the law and equal protection of the law by stipulating, inter alia, that there could be no discrimination on the basis of sex alone---Whilst said rights were subject to reasonable restrictions, as qualified in each case, it was axiomatic that the same ought to normally be given as expansive interpretation as possible in terms of the relevant articles---In the event of a restriction being imposed by the State, the same would fall to be tested by the Court so as to ensure that the restriction was "reasonable" in the true sense---However, in the absence of any curb or constraint imposed by the State, it did not fall to the Court to itself take on that function through proceedings under art. 199 of the Constitution, especially when no fundamental right of a petitioner was being curtailed---Petition did not disclose any valid cause of action and appeared to be nothing more than an attempt to seek publicity---Constitutional petition was dismissed in limine with costs, in circumstances.

BISMA NAUREEN/AMEER JEHAN vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Finance Pakistan, Islamabad arts — 2023 CLC 2038 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 CLC