Lahore, December 26, 2025 – The Lahore High Court has ruled against the federal government’s authority to render citizens’ passports inactive or impose travel bans of five years or more through the Passport Control List, declaring such powers beyond the scope of the parent law. Justice Asim Hafeez, hearing the case at the Multan bench, struck down relevant provisions while upholding the government’s right to cancel, impound, or confiscate passports under proper conditions.
The decision came on a petition by citizen Farhan Ali, who challenged both his placement on the PCL and the legality of passport inactivation rules.
Key Highlights
- Rule 23 of Passports Rules, 2021, allowing passport inactivation declared ultra vires Section 8 of Passports Act, 1974
- Clause in Rule 22 permitting PCL retention for five years or more deemed arbitrary and lacking statutory backing
- Government given 30 days to revise rules for proportionate restraints based on violation severity
- Powers to cancel, impound, or confiscate passports remain intact, subject to statutory requirements
- Petitioner’s earlier representation against PCL placement to be reconsidered afresh
- Ruling aims to prevent covert travel denials that lead to unexpected issues at airports
Court’s Observations on Legal Limits
Justice Hafeez noted that the Passports Act, 1974, only authorizes cancellation, impounding, or confiscation — not inactivation, which he described as an informal measure often bypassing due process.
He pointed out that surreptitious inactivation had left travelers in humiliating situations despite holding valid documents. The judge emphasized that delegated rules cannot exceed the parent law or grant unstructured executive discretion.
Meanwhile, the five-year minimum on the PCL for Category ‘B’ cases — covering non-anti-state refusals — was criticized for lacking guidelines or proportionality. Illegal overstay, for instance, cannot equate to serious offenses like human trafficking.
You May Like To Read: Conflict with Humans Threatens Survival of Endangered Wolves in Sulaiman Range
Implications and Next Steps
The verdict will take effect after 30 days, providing time for authorities to align rules with the Act. Officials from the Directorate General of Immigration and Passports, Federal Investigation Agency, and federal government presented arguments during hearings.
This judgment reinforces procedural safeguards in passport matters, ensuring actions remain within clear legal bounds while maintaining necessary oversight.
Citizens can expect more balanced application of travel restrictions moving forward, as the government works to update the framework in line with the court’s directions.
Check out our latest video:
