The Lahore High Court (LHC) Rawalpindi bench delivered a significant verdict on Wednesday, annulling a previous single bench order that had granted Awami Muslim League (AML) leader Sheikh Rashid permission to travel to Saudi Arabia for performing Umrah. This decision underscores the judiciary’s insistence on strict compliance with legal protocols, especially in cases involving the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA).
The division bench, comprising Justice Jawad Hassan and Justice Tariq Mahmood Bajwa, ruled that the authority to allow accused individuals under the ATA to travel abroad rests solely with the Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC). This ruling came after the federal government filed an intra-court appeal challenging the earlier single bench decision, which had been reserved since March 12.
It is worth noting that the original permission was granted by a single bench led by Justice Sadaqat Ali Khan. However, despite the court’s initial approval, Sheikh Rashid was prevented from departing 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 request.
In its detailed 23-page judgment, the division bench clarified that Sheikh Rashid must now seek authorization from the ATC in Rawalpindi, which holds exclusive jurisdiction over such matters under Section 28-A of the ATA. The court emphasized that the ATC is the only competent authority to regulate passports or grant travel permissions for accused persons under this law, reinforcing the importance of following established legal channels.
The bench further criticized the earlier single judge’s order, stating it was based on a concession made by a law officer who lacked the legal authority to make such a decision. The verdict highlighted that such concessions, when made without proper mandate, cannot override existing judicial commands or statutory provisions. The court stated, “No estoppel arises from a concession made without authority, as it cannot override an existing judicial command.”
This ruling sends a clear message about the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the rule of law, especially in sensitive cases involving anti-terrorism legislation. It also serves as a reminder that procedural correctness must be maintained to ensure justice is served without compromising legal standards.
Meanwhile, the decision has reignited discussions about the balance between individual rights and the stringent requirements of anti-terrorism laws in Pakistan. In a related development, legal experts suggest that this verdict could set a precedent for how travel permissions are handled for other accused individuals under similar circumstances.
As the situation unfolds, Sheikh Rashid’s next steps will likely involve approaching the ATC to seek the necessary approval for his Umrah pilgrimage. Until then, the court’s ruling remains a pivotal reference point in the ongoing dialogue about judicial authority and procedural adherence in Pakistan’s legal system.
