Political crime

2014 PLD 389 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

S. 2Exit from Pakistan (Control) Rules, 2010, R. 2Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 6, 15 & 199Constitutional petitionPolitical casePolitical crimePlacing of name on Exit Control List ("ECL")Grounds for placing name on Exit Control List not mentionedEffect

Memorandum whereby name of petitioner was put on the Exit Control List did not mention any specific ground for deciding to put his name on such list

Although it was not necessary for the Federal Government to specify the grounds for putting name of petitioner on Exit Control List if it thought it was not in the public interest, but the Federal Government did not make any such contention, and instead it only contended that petitioner was accused of high treason, which was a political case and a political crime

Such contention of Federal Government meant that there was no bar to issue reasons for placing name of petitioner on Exit Control List, which was in fact in the larger public interest according to the Federal Government's own contention

In cases of high treason the public interest at large was involved to know the reasons for prosecuting the accused of high treason

Petitioner applied to the Federal Government for deletion of his name from the Exit Control List but the said request/review was also refused allegedly in view of pronouncements of superior courts and pending criminal cases in various courts

No right of hearing was afforded to the petitioner when he applied for deletion of his name but his request was rejected summarily

At the time of placing name of petitioner on Exit Control List and when refusing his request to delete his name from such list neither any reason was shown as provided under clauses (a) to (g) of R.2 of Exit from Pakistan (Control) Rules, 2010 nor any other reason was provided except the pendency of cases or pronouncements of superior courts

Even no specific order of any court was mentioned

Special Court which had been constituted for trying the petitioner for high treason case observed in one of its orders that merely on basis of pendency of high treason case against petitioner, his name could not be placed on Exit Control List; that petitioner could work for gain anywhere and get medical treatment at a medical facility of his own choice, however he was required to appear before the court as and when required and could seek exemption from appearance on justifiable grounds

Merely on apprehension that the petitioner would not return back to Pakistan was no ground for depriving him from exercising his Fundamental Right (of travelling abroad)

Petitioner also filed his medical certificate in court, wherein the medical board had opined that petitioner should have his surgery performed abroad as the technology to perform such surgery was not available in Pakistan

Authenticity of the medical opinion of board or certificate was not challenged by the Federal Government

Memorandum whereby name of petitioner was placed on the Exit Control List was struck down in circumstances

Constitutional petition was disposed of accordingly.