LAHORE: The Lahore High Court has ruled that the computerised national identity card (CNIC) is not a “movable property” of its holder and cannot be blocked, impounded or attached by civil courts as a coercive measure in civil proceedings.

Justice Tanveer Ahmad Sheikh handed down the ruling at Multan Bench, while allowing a writ petition filed by Muhammad Ali Ansari, who had challenged the blocking of his CNIC by the National Database and Registration Authority (Nadra) on the directions of a civil court in execution proceedings.

A civil suit was filed against the petitioner, which came into his knowledge when Nadra blocked his CNIC in pursuance of a civil court order in the execution proceedings.

The petitioner’s counsel argued that the coercive measure adopted by executing court/civil court was in flagrant violation of Section 18(2) of the National Database and Registration Authority Ordinance, 2000.

The court rules civil court has no authority to direct Nadra to block CNIC as a coercive step

He said the civil court was not competent to direct the Nadra authorities to block the CNIC of the petitioner, and Nadra’s act of blocking the CNIC of the petitioner was also illegal and unlawful.

A law officer, on behalf of Nadra, opposed the petition and mainly focused on the point that the CNIC is a movable property of its holder.

He said the CNIC can be attached, impounded, blocked or confiscated by a court of law as a coercive measure in order to procure the attendance of a person.

He pointed out that the blocking of the petitioner’s CNIC was necessary for maintaining the rule of law and preventing the frustration of court proceedings.

The judge, in his detailed judgment, observed that the CNIC, though a physical object, does not qualify as movable property in legal terms.

He held that a CNIC is merely an identity document issued by the federal government and does not confer any proprietary rights upon its holder.

Justice Sheikh declared that since the CNIC remains the property of the federal government under the Nadra Ordinance, 2000, and it cannot be treated as transferable or inheritable property.

Therefore, it falls outside the scope of “movable property” as defined under relevant laws, he added.

The judge maintained that civil courts have no authority to block or impound CNICs as a coercive tool.

He ruled that such actions can only be taken by Nadra itself, strictly in accordance with Section 18 of the Nadra Ordinance and under specific circumstances, such as fraud, duplication or ineligibility.

“The card issued by Nadra cannot be treated as movable property of its holder, hence it cannot be attached, impounded, cancelled or blocked by civil courts in civil proceedings,” the judge noted.

The judge further declared that Nadra’s action of blocking the petitioner’s CNIC on the directions of a civil court was illegal and without lawful authority.

Allowing the petition, the judge directed the Nadra to immediately unblock the petitioner’s CNIC and submit a compliance report within 15 days.

Published in Dawn, April 10th, 2026