FAROOQ SALEH CHOHAN versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, MINISTRY OF INTERIOR THROUGH SECRETARY/SECTION OFFICER, ISLAMABAD
Sections 2 and 3 of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts 4, 9, 10A, 14, 15, 18 and 199 of the General Clause Act (X of 1897), Section 24, a constitutional petition FIR in relation to The source was filed against the applicant in a private business dispute and his jurisdiction in criminal court was executed on the basis of such a criminal trial without speaking the names of such rulers and providing a copy of such restraining order. Enter a name on the Control List (ECL). Nothing was available on the record to show any favoritism before the incoming applicant's name was added to the ECL under Section 2 of the Exit (Pakistan) Ordinance, 1981, to the federal government. Gone, the constitutional applicant's case is a private dispute, which according to the law could be used in the public interest, which did not involve the interest of the government, would not be on the negative list of policy documents prepared by the government, Under the law there will be nothing to admit or impose a fundamental right of an individual from the Pakistan (Control) Ordinance, 1981. Exit to the East, being an extraordinary legislation, emphasized the fundamental constitutional right and freedom of a person to travel abroad; the abolition of the right to travel abroad also meant life, liberty, dignity and lawfulness. Trade may be infringed. The business / professional government may pass a previous restraining order against a person for abnormal change, but was obliged to report such order soon, providing a copy of the restraining order Without it, the applicant could not have sought his valuable right. Pakistan (Control)
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2010
