SABA INTERNATIONAL vs The FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Revenue Division/Chairman Ss

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

SABA INTERNATIONAL VS The FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Revenue Division/Chairman Ss.32(1), 32(2), 32a & 79(1)---Constitution of Pakistan, art. 199---Issuance of Show-Cause Notice, assailing of---Constitutional petition---Maintainability ---Doctrine of judicial restraint---a cardinal principle in the exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction is the doctrine of judicial restraint, particularly with regard to constitutional adjudication---Said principle dictates that courts refrain from deciding constitutional questions if a case can be resolved on other narrow grounds---The rationale behind this is to avoid unnecessary constitutional rulings, which could have far-reaching and unintended consequences---Courts are urged to adopt a minimalist approach, addressing only the specific issues necessary for the determination of the case at hand---By doing so, courts ensure that broader constitutional principles are not unnecessarily invoked or interpreted, thus maintaining judicial prudence and restraint---Furthermore, it underscores the importance of resolving disputes through the most direct and least expansive means, respecting the separation of powers and avoiding encroachments on legislative and executive functions---In summary, this principle safeguards the judiciary's role within its constitutional mandate by ensuring that only the requisite and narrowly focused questions are addressed in judicial decisions---In the present case, a Show-Cause Notice (SCN) based on a seizure-cum-contravention report was issued to the petitioner---In response, the petitioner filed a constitutional petition directly challenging said Show-Cause Notice---High Court exercises its jurisdiction under art. 199 of the Constitution to issue writs in cases where an individual's rights are infringed, or there is a lack of jurisdiction, illegality, or procedural impropriety---Constitutional petition may be maintainable if the petitioner can establish that the Show-Cause Notice was issued without jurisdiction or in violation of the principles of natural justice---One of the primary considerations in determining the maintainability of a constitutional petition is whether the petitioner has an alternate and efficacious remedy available---Courts generally emphasize the exhaustion of all statutory remedies before invoking constitutional jurisdiction--- In the context of customs disputes, the petitioner typically has the opportunity to respond to the Show-Cause Notice, participate in adjudication proceedings, and, if aggrieved by the decision, file an appeal under the relevant provisions of the Customs act, 1969---It would be appropriate, for the issues asserted by the petitioner to be raised before Respondent /Collector of Customs, who must first determine whether they have the jurisdiction to proceed with the matter before taking any further action, ensuring adherence to procedural propriety and statutory mandates---Constitutional petition was disposed of.

SABA INTERNATIONAL vs The FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Revenue Division/Chairman Ss — 2026 PTD 464 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PTD