Rehan Shahab (Petitioner) VS Banking Court No. II & others (Respondent)

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Constitutional Petition No. D-73 of 2026 (Rehan Shahab versus Banking Court No.II at Karachi & others) Date Order with signature of Judge

1.For order on Misc. No.268/2026 (Urgency)

2.For order on office objection Nos.1 to 3

3.For order on Misc. No.269/2026 (Exemption)

4.For hearing of main case

Mr. Tahir Rasheed advocate for the petitioner

ORDER

Adnan-ul-Karim Memon, J. The petitioner prays that Respondent No.2 be directed to immediately release his blocked CNIC No.42101-1779798-7 and that settlement of the matter out of Court be submitted within one week before this this Court.

2.The case of the petitioner is that on 27.10.2025, Respondent No.2 blocked his CNIC at the request of decree holder/Askari Bank in Execution Proceedings under Section 19(1) of the FIO, 2001.

3.Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner never received any notice from Respondents No.1 or 2, and the Banking Court passed orders in his absence. He emphasized that the petitioner is ready and willing to settle the outstanding amounts out of Court and prayed to allow this petition.

4.We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner on the maintainability of the petition and perused the material placed on record.

5.It appears that the Banking Court No.II, Karachi, in Execution Application under Section 19(1) of the FIO, 2001 filed by Askari Bank Limited against Rehan Shahab, has allowed an application under Section 51(e) read with Section 151 CPC for blocking the petitioner’s / Judgment Debtor’s CNIC and directed to NADRA to block his CNIC No.42101-1779798-7 and submit a compliance report.

6.In view of the above, it is observed that adequate remedy is available to the petitioner before the learned Banking Court in the pending execution proceedings. The petitioner, instead of directly invoking the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court, may put up his appearance before the learned Banking

Court for settlement of the decretal amount and for redressal of his grievance with regard to blocking of his CNIC.

7.As the order for blocking of CNIC has emanated from the learned Banking Court, the petitioner may move an appropriate application before the same Court which shall consider and decide the matter strictly in accordance with law; and, if the petitioner is presently out of the country, such circumstance may also be taken into consideration by the learned Banking Court while dealing with his request.

8.In the circumstances, no interference by this Court is warranted at this stage. The petition is, therefore, misconceived and is dismissed with the above observations, leaving the petitioner at liberty to avail appropriate remedy before the learned Banking Court in accordance with law.

JUDGE

JUDGE