The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has declared part of Rule 22(2)(b) of the Passport Rules, 2021 unconstitutional, ruling that government agencies cannot restrict a citizen’s foreign travel through the Passport Control List (PCL) without clear legal authority.
Justice Raja Inaam Ameen Minhas issued the detailed judgment in a case involving Moinuddin, who was stopped at Islamabad International Airport on December 18, 2025, while travelling to Saudi Arabia for Umrah.
Moinuddin held a valid Pakistani passport, a valid Saudi visa and a confirmed air ticket. According to the court record, his passport had not been cancelled, confiscated or impounded, and authorities had not refused its issuance or renewal.
The case concerned his placement on the PCL on December 24, 2024, following a recommendation from NCB-INTERPOL that was forwarded by an FIA immigration official. The matter was linked to his deportation from the United Kingdom after he had served a three-year sentence for causing death by dangerous driving while under the influence of alcohol.
The court noted that Moinuddin had completed his sentence and that no criminal case, inquiry or investigation was pending against him in Pakistan. He was also not a proclaimed offender, and no extradition request was pending against him.
Passport authorities had argued that his continued placement on the PCL was necessary because his conduct had damaged Pakistan’s international reputation and that the restriction could serve as a deterrent.
The IHC rejected these grounds, observing that such reasons were not provided for in the Passports Act, 1974, or the Passport Rules. The court distinguished between refusing or cancelling a passport and restricting a person from travelling abroad.
Justice Minhas held that authorities must have clear legal authority before restricting a citizen’s foreign travel through the PCL mechanism. The judgment also noted that the disputed rule did not clearly identify which authority had the power to place a person’s name on the PCL.
The court further observed that the restriction lacked important procedural safeguards, including clear criteria, prior notice, an opportunity for a hearing, reasons for the decision and communication to the affected citizen.
According to the judgment, the absence of such safeguards could result in a person learning about a travel restriction only after reaching an immigration counter.
The IHC declared the disputed portion of Rule 22(2)(b) beyond the authority granted under Sections 8 and 13 of the Passports Act, 1974. It also held the provision inconsistent with constitutional protections under Articles 4, 9, 10A and 15.
The court found that the continued restriction on Moinuddin’s travel had no present legal justification after he had completed his sentence and had no pending proceedings in Pakistan.
The IHC also expressed displeasure over the authorities’ failure to comply with an earlier order and directed them to decide Moinuddin’s application within one week through a detailed and reasoned order.
The court set aside the agency’s January 26, 2026 order and declared Moinuddin’s placement on the PCL on December 24, 2024 unlawful and without legal effect.
Authorities were directed to remove his name from the PCL within 15 days of receiving a certified copy of the judgment. They were also directed not to stop him from lawful foreign travel on the basis of the disputed PCL placement.
The judgment clarified that authorities may still restrict travel or take other action where the law expressly permits it, but they must follow the applicable legal procedure and exercise their powers within the limits of the law.
