KARACHI: The Sindh High Court has observed that placing anyone on the exit control list (ECL) constituted a serious curtailment of fundamental rights and such restriction must satisfy the test of legality, necessity, proportionality and reasonableness.

“Mere pendency of proceedings or involvement in concluded cases, particularly after acquittal, cannot by itself sustain continued restriction on a citizen’s fundamental right to travel,” noted a two-judge bench headed by Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon.

The bench made these observations while allowing a petition filed by a former managing director of the Pakistan Petroleum Limited (PPL) seeking removal of his name from the no-fly list.

Citing the ministry of interior, Federal Investigation Agency and others as respondents, Syed Wamiq Abrar Bukhari approached the SHC and argued that he had served as MD of the PPL from 2015 to 2018 whereas two FIRs were registered against officials of the PPL in 2022 and he was also implicated in absentia.

The petitioner stated that at the time of registration of such cases he was abroad and subsequently his name was placed on the ECL along with freezing of his bank accounts through the impugned memorandum issued in June 2023.

Bench orders authorities to remove name of ex-PPL chief from exit control list

The counsel for the petitioner argued that after the full-fledged trial, all accused persons including the petitioner were acquitted by a special court through the judgments handed down in April and July last year which have also attained finality.

However, the lawyer also contended that despite repeated representations, the respondents failed to remove the petitioner’s name from the ECL and to unfreeze his bank accounts without assigning any lawful justification.

An assistant attorney general argued that necessary correspondence had already been initiated by the FIA for removal of the petitioner’s name from the ECL through a letter sent last month thereby indicating that no further impediment survived for continuation of his name on the no-fly list.

The federal law officer contended that the matter was already under active consideration of the competent authority in light of recommendations of the FIA and appropriate orders were expected to be passed in accordance with law.

The bench in its order said that the petitioner’s grievance was pertaining to his continued placement on the ECL despite subsequent acquittal of all accused persons in both cases.

It also noted that no speaking order, independent application of mind or contemporaneous justification has been produced by the respondents to demonstrate that the petitioner continued to fall within any recognised legal category warranting restriction under the Exit from Pakistan (Control) Ordinance, 1981 or the relevant ECL Rules.

The bench also said, “It is well-settled that placement on the ECL constitutes a serious curtailment of fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 15 and 25 of the Constitution, and such restriction must satisfy the test of legality, necessity, proportionality, and reasonableness. In the present case, none of these constitutional thresholds appear to have been met once the foundational criminal proceedings have resulted in acquittal and the investigating agency itself has recommended removal.”

It further observed that continued retention of the petitioner’s name on the ECL despite clear departmental recommendations in his favour reflected administrative inaction without lawful justification rendering the impugned memorandum arbitrary and unsustainable in law.

While setting aside the impugned memorandum, the bench directed the respondents to forthwith remove the petitioner’s name from no-fly list and extend all consequential relief in accordance with law.

Published in Dawn, April 25th, 2026