FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN vs SHEIKH RASHEED AHMED Ss — 2026 PLD 528 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.

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN VS SHEIKH RASHEED AHMED Ss.2(e), 13 & 28-a---Constitution of Pakistan, arts.15 & 199---Travel abroad by accused---Right to movement---Jurisdiction of anti-Terrorism Court---Accused facing trial under anti-Terrorism act, 1997---Accused granted permission by High Court to travel abroad during pendency of trial---No-objection statement in favour of the accused by the law officer, challenge to---Reasonable restrictions---Scope---The respondent was facing trial under the anti-Terrorism act, 1997 and had earlier been removed from the Exit Control List (ECL) but was later subjected to travel restriction through placement in Provincial National Identification List (PNIL)---Despite obtaining permission from the anti-Terrorism Court (ATC), he filed a constitutional petition and was allowed to travel abroad for Umrah based on a no-objection statement by the Law Officer---The Federation challenged this permission by filing the present intra-court appeal---Pivotal question requiring determination in the present appeal was whether only the anti-Terrorism Court could permit the accused under S.28-a of the act, 1997 to travel abroad or whether the High Court could grant such permission under constitutional jurisdiction?---Held: In circumstances where an accused person facing trial under the act, 1997 sought permission to travel abroad, the appropriate and lawful course was to approach the anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) concerned---That Court, being fully cognizant of the stage of trial, the conduct of the accused, and the overall circumstances of the case, was best placed to determine whether such permission could be granted---Permission for travelling abroad granted otherwise than by the ATC was not sustainable---Respondent failed to challenge any specific order or action and the prayer of the petition was vague; therefore, the Single Judge in Chambers ought not to have exercised jurisdiction or issued directives beyond matters explicitly raised in the writ petition---Notwithstanding the availability of statutory remedies, the respondent chose not to approach the ATC in the first instance; instead, he invoked constitutional jurisdiction---The appropriate and competent forum for seeking permission to travel abroad was indeed the ATC where the proceedings against the respondent were pending---The impugned order was passed primarily on the basis of a concession made by the law officer, which was beyond his lawful mandate and contrary to the statutory framework, against which no estoppel could arise, as a concession made without authority cannot override a subsisting judicial command---Impugned order was set aside---Present intra-court appeal was allowed, in circumstances.

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN vs SHEIKH RASHEED AHMED Ss — 2026 PLD 528 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PLD