ARY COMMUNICATIONS LTD. vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Interior, Islamabad Regln

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

ARY COMMUNICATIONS LTD. VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Interior, Islamabad Regln. 9---Renewal of license---Security clearance---Federal Government, decision of---Scope---Provision of Regln. 9 of Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Television Broadcast Station Operations) Regulations, 2012 does not provide any space for Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) either to ignore or bypass Ministry of Interior's decision; thus it is binding on PEMRA---If such decision is not binding on PEMRA, the provision of Regln. 9 of Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Television Broadcast Station Operations) Regulations, 2012 would have demanded a show cause or a notice to licensee by PEMRA on the event or situation where the security clearance was later refused or cancelled. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 50 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH ARY COMMUNICATIONS LTD. VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Interior, Islamabad Ss. 26 & 30-a---Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory authority (Television Broadcast Station Operations) Regulations, 2012, Regln. 9---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXXIX, Rr.1 & 2---Specific Relief act (I of 1877), Ss. 42 & 54---Suit for declaration and injunction---Interim injunction, grant of---Cancellation of No Objection Certificate---Veracity of content---Evaluation---Plaintiff company was licensee of Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory authority engaged in television broadcasting---Plaintiff company was granted No Objection Certificate by Ministry of Interior for the purposes of security clearance but the same was withdrawn against an aired news content alleged to have created discord between state institutions, masses and armed Forces of Pakistan---Validity---authorities did not give any material in support of the allegation---Law required something more than such statements originally presented by PEMRa and they added nothing in it---If the content of program in question was seditious or was of such magnitude that it formed a narrative as demonstrated, then under Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory authority Ordinance, 2002 it was responsibility of the Council of Complaint under S. 26 of Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory authority Ordinance, 2002 to decide veracity of such content---Reasons demonstrated by the authority were domain of the Council of Complaints---From security agencies/Ministry of Interior, in-depth analysis of direct involvement was required, which could be a threat to national security---Decision of High Court was to act as a binding piece of direction and would ultimately end up in cancellation of a license or not renewing of license---In both ways rights of plaintiff company would be infringed---Where the rights, guaranteed by the Constitution and law were to be infringed, legal recourse was always available---High Court granted interim injunction in favour of plaintiff and against the authority---application was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 50 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH ARY COMMUNICATIONS LTD. VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Interior, Islamabad art. 19---Freedom of speech---Principle---Reasonable restriction imposed by law, does not mean to condemn a person/entity without any justification and without hearing. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 50 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH ARY COMMUNICATIONS LTD. VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Interior, Islamabad Regln. 9---Decision of Federal Government---Scope---Decision of Ministry, forms a concluded view under Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance, 2002---Aggrieved party should be heard before and if that has not happened, and/or denied, then it constitutes a cause and calls for a consequential remedy---Any cancellation notification, whereby security clearance was denied, is an independent cause and can be challenged independently as right is infringed, in case it is acted upon and given effect by PEMRA without its judicial determination first.

ARY COMMUNICATIONS LTD. vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Interior, Islamabad Regln — 2024 PLD 50 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLD