Legal Principle & Question Decided

Ruling Summary: This decision was rendered by the Sindh High Court, officially reported as 2025 SHC 786. In this matter between Const. P. 5976/2025 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi - Mst Sakina (Petitioner) and the Respondent, the court adjudicated key questions of statutory construction, procedural regularity, and legal precedent under Pakistani law.

Core Holding: The honorable bench evaluated governing statutory provisions and judicial authorities to establish the rights of the parties, delivering the binding reasoning set out below.

Full Judgment Text & Judicial Ruling

COURT: Sindh High Court CASE NO: Const. P. 5976/2025 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi CITATION: 2026 SHC KHI 786 PARTIES: Mst Sakina (Petitioner) ORDER DATE: 25-MAR-26 BENCH: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Hasan (Akber) A.F.R: Yes ------------------------------------------------------------ ORDER SHEET THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, AT KARACHI Const. Petition No.D-5976 of 2025. (Mst. Sakina v. Federation of Pakistan & other) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: order with signature(s) of Judge(s) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Before: Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon Mr. Justice Muhammad Hassan Akbar Date of hearing and Order: 25.03.2026 Mr. Muhammad Riaz, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Abdul Samad Khan, advocate for NADRA.

O R D E R Adnan-ul-Karim Memon, J . – Petitioner Mst. Sakina filed the instant petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 , seeking directions regarding issuance/unblocking of CNIC of her deceased father bearing No. 42101-1183760-1. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner’s father obtained MNC on 04.04.1988 and a passport on that basis, remained employed in a factory, retired on superannuation, and after his retirement the petitioner is receiving his EOBI pension; however, the CNIC has not been issued/unblocked. 3. Learned counsel for NADRA submitted that the CNIC in question pertains to Abdul Malik, which was digitally impounded in 2011 due to non -availability of pre -1971 documents. The CNIC was temporarily cleared in 2017, and the case was later examined by the Verification Board in 2022, which referred the matter to the Verifying Agency due to insufficient documentary evidence. He added that t he case was subsequently forwarded to DLC Central in 2023, but the petitioner did not approach the DLC. It was further submitted that the petitioner’s own application was permanently rejected for being older than four years, while another application is un der process before the Verification Board, Zonal Mega North Nazimabad. 4. Learned counsel stated that the petitioner is willing to approach the concerned Zonal Office Verification Board, Ayesha Manzil, for re -evaluation of the case and for passing a speaking order. The request so made by the parties seems to be reasonable and acceded to. 5. In view of the statement , the petitioner is directed to approach the concerned Verification Board, NADRA Zonal Office Ayesha Manzil, for re -evaluation of the case and the Verification Board shall pass a speaking order in accordance with law within two (02) weeks after hearing her. 6. The instant petition along with pending application(s) stands disposed of in the above terms. JUDGE JUDGE Manthar Brohi

Related Legal Research & Directories

• Browse all judgments from Sindh High Court
• Search Pakistani statutes: Constitution of Pakistan 1973, PPC, CrPC, CPC & Family Laws
• Analyze this case with Al Wakeelo AI Legal Assistant