NIZAR ALI FAZWANI vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary of Interior, Islamabad Ss

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

NIZAR ALI FAZWANI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary of Interior, Islamabad Ss. 3 & 8---Passports Rules, 2021, R. 23---Regulatory framework of foreign travel for Pakistani citizens---Recalling, cancellation and impounding of passports---Essence and scope---Issuance of show-cause notice and opportunity of hearing before impounding, requirement of---Exception---Pakistani citizens' travel is regulated by the Passports Act of 1974 and its related rules---Section 3 of the Passports Act, 1974 mandates a valid passport for foreign travel, while S. 8 thereof grants the Federal Government broad authority to manage passports, including recalling, cancellation, and impounding---Section 8 of the Act, 1974 generally requires a show-cause notice before these actions, except in national security cases---A review process is available for such cases---Rule 23 of the Passports Rules, 2021 outlines the procedures for impounding passports, specifying authorized officials and grounds for action, including security threats, avoiding prosecution, and criminal activities---Impounded passports are to be kept in custody, and failure to surrender a passport upon requisition is punishable---Section 8 of the Passports Act, 1974, empowers the Federal Government, through a Secretary or authorized officer, to recall passports for cancellation, impoundment, or confiscation---This requires a show cause notice to the passport holder, as per subsection (2), however, subsection (3) exempts the government from providing notice or a hearing if the passport holder is deemed to be involved in subversive activities or actions detrimental to Pakistan's interests or foreign relations---Subsection (4) then grants the affected person the right to challenge the decision. Citation Name: 2025 CLC 1607 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case NIZAR ALI FAZWANI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary of Interior, Islamabad S. 2---Foreign travel, restriction on---Inclusion of name in Exit Control List (ECL)---Ministry of Interior passing the order restricting foreign travel of Pakistani citizen---Legality---Power, authority and jurisdiction of Ministry of Interior---Power to restrict travel under the Exit from Pakistan (Control) Ordinance, 1981 resides solely with the Federal Cabinet and not the secretary of the Ministry of Interior---Regardless, the fundamental rights of the people of Pakistan are beyond any form of curtailment. Citation Name: 2025 CLC 1607 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case NIZAR ALI FAZWANI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary of Interior, Islamabad S. 2---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 4, 9 & 15 ---Placing restriction on foreign travel---Inclusion of name in Exit Control List (ECL)---International travel being a fundamental right---Fundamental rights, protection of---Scope---Foreign travel can be restricted despite valid travel documents---Reasons for placing restriction on foreign travel can be withheld---Travel restrictions placed by state must be lawful---Article 4 of the Constitution guarantees legal protection for all---Articles 15, 9 & 4 establish the right to travel, including international travel, as a fundamental right, though it's subject to lawful, reasonable restrictions in the public interest---Arbitrary limitations, like those based on political beliefs, are unacceptable; restrictions must be for genuine national security concerns---Travel is vital for information access and personal liberty, linked to freedom of speech and association---Fundamental rights protect individuals from arbitrary state power and are essential for a free society---Even unenumerated rights integral to named rights are protected---While fundamental rights are crucial, they must be balanced against the State's need to maintain order---The Constitution allows for reasonable restrictions on certain rights in the public interest, but these restrictions must be lawful---The right to travel, a basic human right, is integral to personal liberty---International travel is not merely a convenience but a fundamental right under Art. 9 of our Constitution---Modern society necessitates global mobility for education, employment, and personal fulfillment, making travel a crucial aspect of both liberty and life---Exit from Pakistan (Control) Ordinance, 1981, empowers the Federal Government to restrict travel under S. 2, even with valid documents, if deemed in the public interest---Although S. 2 of the Ordinance 1981 allows restrictions without prior hearings, overriding natural justice, Supreme Court rulings mandate that the Federal Cabinet exercises this authority---While prior hearings are often omitted to prevent immediate departures, the Federal Cabinet can withhold reasons for the ban if deemed against the public interest. Citation Name: 2025 CLC 1607 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case NIZAR ALI FAZWANI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary of Interior, Islamabad S. 2---Passports Act (XX of 1974), Ss. 3 & 8---Passports Rules, 2021, R. 23---Removal of name sought from Exit Control List (ECL) on medical grounds---Right to travel---Fundamental rights, protection of---Mere criminal involvement does not justify ECL placement---Petitioner aged 85-yearswas suffering from serious health conditions and sought removal of his name from the Exit Control List (ECL) to travel abroad for urgent medical treatment---His name had been placed on the ECL in connection with a NAB Reference relating to alleged financial misappropriation in a housing society---The petitioner argued that his continued placement on the ECL was arbitrary, lacked legal basis and violated his fundamental rights under Arts. 4, 9 & 15 of the Constitution---The case was later transferred to Anti-Corruption Establishment and NAB no longer held jurisdiction---Question for determination before the High Court was as to "Whether the placement of the petitioner's name on the Exit Control List (ECL) by the Ministry of Interior, based solely on NAB's request and without independent justification or adherence to legal procedure, violated the petitioner's fundamental rights?"---Held: The superior courts of the country have consistently ruled against belated ECL placements, especially when individuals had previously travelled freely---The case reported as 2017 SCMR 1179 clarified that mere registration of a criminal case was insufficient for ECL placement and reaffirmed that restrictions must align with the Exit from Pakistan (Control) Rules, 2010---Further the Supreme Court emphasized that executive discretion was not absolute and upheld High Court decisions striking down unlawful restrictions---Consequently this being settled law, mere criminal involvement did not justify ECL placement---Citizens had a fundamental right to liberty under Art. 9, which, combined with Arts. 4 & 15, included the right to travel, unless restricted by a law enacted in the public interest---Moreover, mere registration of a crime did not constitute a "public interest" justification for restricting a person's liberty---Therefore, the respondent's actions in placing the petitioner's name on the ECL based on the criminal case were inconsistent with established legal principles---Ministry of Interior's decision to place the petitioner's name on the ECL was deemed arbitrary and automatic---This action was solely driven by instructions from the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), without independent assessment or a reasoned order from the Ministry---Consequently, the Ministry failed to demonstrate a legitimate basis for exercising its authority under S. 2(3) of the Exit from Pakistan (Control) Ordinance, 1981---This lack of due process resulted in a violation of the petitioner's fundamental rights, specifically Arts. 4, 9, and 15 of the Constitution---Furthermore, it unjustly prevented the petitioner from seeking medical treatment---Therefore, because of respondents' actions placing the petitioner on the ECL, barring his international travel, and removing him from the flight, contempt notice was served upon the delinquent officials, as their actions were arbitrary, invalid from the beginning (void ab initio), and beyond their legal authority (without jurisdiction)---Respondents' actions in placing the petitioner's name on the Exit Control List (ECL), or Passport Control List (PCL), if any, were unlawful, therefore, same were overturned by directing the respondents to immediately remove the petitioner's name from the ECL---Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances.

NIZAR ALI FAZWANI vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary of Interior, Islamabad Ss — 2025 CLC 1607 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLC