The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) has ruled that the Sindh High Court (SHC) committed judicial overreach by exercising suo motu jurisdiction against police officials and interfering in policy guidelines without justification. A two-member bench of the FCC, comprising Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi and Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, conducted the hearing of an appeal against the SHC judgment.
Background of the Case
The counsel for the petitioners contended that the directions regarding internal police reforms and monitoring of inquiry proceedings by the High Court in writ jurisdiction, when the matter was not before the Court in the subject petitions, amount to judicial encroachment on executive and administrative functions. The Prosecutor General of Sindh submitted that the guidelines contained in the impugned order dated 27 October 2025, primarily concerning arrest and detention of suspects/accused, were borrowed from a 1996 judgment of the Supreme Court of India in the case of D. K. Basu v. State of West Bengal.
Government Legislation Supersedes 30-Year-Old Guidelines
The Prosecutor General further submitted that the Government of Sindh has passed several amendments in legislation, including the Sindh Act No. XI of 2019, Police Order 2002, Amendments in Police Rules 1934 (2021), Torture and Custodial Death (Prevention and Punishment) Act, 2022, IGP’s Standard Operating Procedure for Arrest in Cognizable Offences, 2021, and the IGP’s directives dated 15 June 2022. All the observations referred to in the impugned orders have already been considered and framed by the Legislature in a more comprehensive and up-to-date fashion, considering the advancement of technology. Hence, the 1996 Guidelines shall have no legal effect, having been superseded by these more recent Pakistani Rules, Acts, SOPs, and directives.
Judicial Overreach Confirmed
Advocate General of Sindh pointed out that the judge of the High Court committed judicial overreach while passing the impugned orders in terms of jurisdiction and failed to consider that courts, as a general rule, must not interfere with policy guidelines. The FCC agreed with this position. The FCC judgment stated that these petitions are converted into appeals and disposed of in the terms that the impugned orders dated 27 October 2025 and 3 November 2025, passed by the High Court of Sindh in constitutional petition No. S-1139 of 2025, to the extent of exercising suo moto jurisdiction against the police officials and interfering in policy guidelines without justification, are set aside as being the result of assumption of suo moto jurisdiction which is not vested with the High Court under Article 199 of the Constitution, 1973, as the observations contained therein amount to judicial overreach.
Impact and Continuation of Inquiries
The FCC concluded that the inquiries initiated and the investigation to be conducted against the petitioners, in both these petitions, shall continue in accordance with law without being influenced by any observation(s)/direction(s) that were beyond the lis which were fixed before the learned single judge of the High Court in the constitution petition. The ruling reinforces the separation of powers, emphasizing that policy guidelines are an executive function and courts should not interfere without proper jurisdiction.
