ABDUL REHMAN vs State S — 2026 PLD 388 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

ABDUL REHMAN VS State S. 18---Passports Act (XX of 1974), S. 8---Power to cancel, impound or confiscate Computerized National Identity Card, Passport and Bank Account---Jurisdiction of Courts---Scope---Petitioner was the complainant of a case FIR and after the investigation of the case, report under S.173, Cr.P.C., was submitted and the charge against the accused was framed, which they denied and claimed trial---Thereafter, the Trial Court proceeded to summon the prosecution witnesses including the petitioner who was the complainant of the case however, despite repeated orders of the Trial Court, the prosecution witnesses including the petitioner did not appear before the Trial Court whereby the Trial Court proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 10.04.2025, directing that the Computerized National Identity Card (CNIC), Passport and Bank Accounts of the petitioner be "blocked"---Validity---As per S.18(1) of the National Database and Registration Authority Ordinance, 2000, only authority which lies with National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) with regard to any Computerized National Identity Card (CNIC) of acitizen, is that it may cancel, impound or confiscate the said Computerized National Identity Card (CNIC)---In this regard, S.18 of the National Database and Registration Authority Ordinance, 2000, specifically provided reasons for cancelling impounding or confiscating the Computerized National Identity Cards (CNIC)---Trial Court had no authority under the law to direct such cancellation, impounding or confiscation of the Computerized National Identity Card (CNIC) of the petitioner---In this manner, the impugned order passed by the Trial Court suffered from a lack of jurisdiction---Furthermore, with regard to the part of the order whereby the Trial Court directed that the passport of the petitioner be also "blocked", the conditions in which, the cancelling, impounding or confiscation of a passport could be ordered have been detailed in S.8 of the Passports Act, 1974, and the said provisions did not allow the Trial Court to order such cancellation, impounding or confiscation of a passport---Said provisions of the Passports Act, 1974, further made it clear that the impugned order was passed by the Trial Court without having jurisdiction in the matter---With regard to the blocking of the accounts of the petitioner established with various banking institutions, the Trial Court directed the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) to do the same however, National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) had made it clear that they were not invested with the said jurisdiction to direct the banking authorities to block any account established with them by any of their customers---In this manner, the impugned order also suffered from illegality---Petition was allowed, accordingly, and impugned order of Trial Court was set-aside.

ABDUL REHMAN vs State S — 2026 PLD 388 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PLD