The Lahore High Court recently examined preliminary objections in a sensitive petition filed by Karnail Singh, an Indian national, who is challenging the validity of his wife Sarbjit Kaur’s nikah in Pakistan. The case has drawn significant attention due to its complex cross-border legal implications and the serious allegations involved. The court’s primary focus during the hearing was to scrutinize the legal grounds on which a foreign citizen can appoint a legal representative within Pakistan’s jurisdiction.
Presiding over the proceedings, Justice Farooq Haider sought detailed arguments regarding the authority of a foreign national to engage an attorney in Pakistan, emphasizing that any such appointment must strictly comply with Pakistani laws. The petitioner’s legal team, led by advocates Nawaz Sheikh and Ali Changezi Sindhu, informed the court that Karnail Singh had designated former Member of Provincial Assembly Mahinder Pal Singh as his legal representative to pursue the case on his behalf.
The petition itself revolves around serious allegations that Sarbjit Kaur, who arrived in Pakistan on November 3, 2025, on a short-term pilgrimage visa, was subjected to coercion. It claims that she was blackmailed using compromising photographs, forcibly converted to Islam, and subsequently married against her will. The petition further highlights that under the Hindu Marriage Act, a change in religion does not automatically annul an existing marriage, raising important questions about the legal status of the nikah performed in Pakistan.
During the hearing, the court’s registrar office raised a procedural concern, pointing out that the Special Power of Attorney submitted by the petitioner had not been authenticated by Pakistan’s Foreign Office. This technicality added another layer of complexity to the case, prompting the court to delve deeper into the procedural validity of the petitioner’s legal standing.
When the petitioner’s counsel argued that international human rights conventions support the right of a foreign national to appoint legal representation in such matters, the court clarified that its assessment must be grounded solely within the framework of Pakistani law. The judges stressed the importance of adhering to domestic legal provisions, underscoring that international treaties cannot override national statutes in this context.
Given the intricate legal questions and the serious nature of the allegations, the Lahore High Court decided to grant additional time for the petitioner’s legal team to prepare comprehensive arguments. The hearing was therefore adjourned and rescheduled for March 2, allowing both sides to present their cases with greater clarity and legal precision. This case is expected to set important precedents regarding the rights of foreign nationals in Pakistan’s legal system, especially in sensitive matters involving personal status and religious conversion.
