The Lahore High Court (LHC) Rawalpindi bench delivered a significant ruling on Wednesday, annulling a previous single bench decision that had granted Awami Muslim League (AML) leader Sheikh Rashid permission to travel to Saudi Arabia for performing Umrah. This development reaffirms the judiciary’s strict stance on travel restrictions imposed on individuals accused under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA), underscoring that only an Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) possesses the jurisdiction to authorize such travel.
The division bench, consisting of Justice Jawad Hassan and Justice Tariq Mahmood Bajwa, issued the verdict following the federal government’s intra-court appeal challenging the earlier order. This appeal had been under consideration since March 12, reflecting the court’s careful deliberation on the matter. The bench’s decision effectively overturns the ruling made by a single judge, Justice Sadaqat Ali Khan, who had initially permitted Sheikh Rashid to undertake the religious pilgrimage.
It is important to recall that despite the single bench’s approval, Sheikh Rashid was prevented from boarding his flight at the airport in November of the previous year. This incident led him to file a contempt of court petition against officials from the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) immigration and passport departments, highlighting the complexities surrounding his travel restrictions. The latest judgment clarifies the legal framework governing such cases, emphasizing that the authority to regulate the international travel of accused persons under Section 28-A of the ATA rests solely with the Anti-Terrorism Court handling the case.
The 23-page detailed verdict pointed out that the earlier permission granted by the single judge was based on a concession made by a law officer, which the division bench found to be beyond the officer’s lawful powers. The court stressed that such concessions cannot supersede statutory provisions or existing judicial mandates. The ruling explicitly stated, “No estoppel arises from a concession made without authority, as it cannot override an existing judicial command,” reinforcing the principle that legal procedures must be strictly followed in matters involving anti-terrorism laws.
This decision highlights the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the rule of law, particularly in sensitive cases involving national security and anti-terrorism legislation. By directing Sheikh Rashid to approach the ATC in Rawalpindi for permission, the court has reaffirmed the procedural safeguards designed to ensure that travel permissions are granted only after thorough legal scrutiny. This move also sends a clear message about the limits of judicial and executive discretion in cases governed by the Anti-Terrorism Act.
Overall, the Lahore High Court’s ruling marks a crucial step in clarifying the legal boundaries for accused individuals seeking to travel abroad. It underscores the importance of following established judicial channels and reinforces the role of the Anti-Terrorism Court as the competent authority in such matters. This verdict will likely influence similar cases in the future, ensuring that the law is applied consistently and transparently across the country.
