Matee Ullah (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan & others (Respondent)

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Constitutional Petition No. D-5199 of 2025 (Matee Ullah versus Federation of Pakistan & others)

Date Order with signature of Judge Before:

Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon Mr. Justice Muhammad Jaffer Raza

Date of hearing and order: 03.9.2026

Mr. Waqar Alam Abbasi advocate alongwith Mr. Arsalan Naeem, Advocate, for the petitioner Ms. Wajiha Mehdi, Assistant Attorney General Mr. Abdus Samad Khan, Law Officer, NADRA Mr. Asif Ali Korai, Assistant Commissioner, Revenue, Keamari, Karachi, on behalf of the Deputy Commissioner, Keamari, Karachi Syed Arbab Ali Shah, Incharge, Illegal Foreigners Holding Camp

ORDER

Adnan-ul-Karim Memon, J. Petitioner has filed this Constitutional Petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, with the following prayer: - a. To set aside the impugned Order dated 07.08.2026 passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge Karachi-West.

b. To take legal action against the respondent No.3 for his illegal acts and confinement/detention of detenues.

c. To direct the respondent No.3 to hand over the custody of detenues to the petitioner.

d. To direct the NADRA / respondent No.2 to unblock the CNICs of detenues.

2.The petitioner’s counsel contends that the three detenues, being the cousins of the petitioner and real brothers, are Pakistani citizens by birth and possess valid identity and other supporting documents. He alleges that on 04.08.2026 they were forcibly taken away by unidentified persons/ Government officials, without disclosing their identity, producing any warrant, or informing the family of the grounds of detention. It is submitted that despite efforts to trace them, they were neither produced before any competent court nor were their whereabouts disclosed. The petitioner’s counsel claims that the detenues are unlawfully confined at the Illegal Foreigners Holding Point, Government College of Technology, Ghani Chowrangi, Karachi. He approached the concerned SHO but received no relief and thereafter filed a habeas corpus petition under Section 491 Cr.P.C. before the Sessions Judge Karachi-West. Although a raid was conducted and a report submitted, the said habeas corpus petition was dismissed on 07.08.2026. Hence, the petitioner seeks setting aside of the impugned order, release of the detenues, legal action against the persons responsible for their alleged illegal detention, and restoration/unblocking of their CNICs.

3.The learned Assistant Attorney General (AAG), assisted by Law Officer, NADRA, Assistant Commissioner, Revenue, Keamari, Karachi, and Syed Arbab Ali Shah, Incharge, Illegal Foreigners Holding Camp, submits that pursuant to the Federal Government’s Illegal Foreigners Repatriation Plan (IFRP), the Ministry of Interior Notification dated 30.10.2023, issued under the Foreigners Act, 1946, authorized the concerned authorities to arrest, detain and repatriate illegal or unregistered foreigners, including visa overstayers, subject to the prescribed legal exceptions. She submitted that in furtherance thereof, the Government of Sindh designated GCT, SITE, Keamari, Karachi, as a holding point for ACC-card holders and illegal Afghan nationals. It was submitted that on 31.07.2026, the DLC Mirpurkhas (District Level Implementation Committee), after individually hearing eight suspected Afghan nationals and examining their documents and verification record, found seven persons unable to satisfactorily establish their Pakistani nationality and assessed them to be Afghan nationals, while the case of one person claiming Pakistani nationality was referred to the competent Karachi DLC for further verification. She added that the seven persons were accordingly transferred to the designated holding point at GCT, Karachi, under police escort for screening and completion of the prescribed legal formalities by the competent authorities. The AAG emphasized that the said transfer was not a final order of deportation but only an administrative measure pending further verification. It was further submitted that the applicable mechanism for CNIC/nationality verification requires individual assessment on the basis of legally verifiable documents and, therefore, any final repatriation could only be undertaken after completion of the prescribed verification process and satisfaction of the competent authority, in accordance with law, the IFRP and applicable SOPs. The AAG submits that deportation is carried out only after due verification through NADRA, police and intelligence agencies, scrutiny of documents, and an opportunity for clarification. She further submits that the petitioner’s application under Section 491 Cr.P.C. had already been dismissed by the Sessions Judge, Karachi-West. Accordingly, she seeks dismissal of the petition, asserting that the deportation process of illegal foreigners is being conducted in accordance with law and prescribed SOPs.

4.We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their assistance.

5.The principal grievance of the petitioner is that the detenues, claimed to be Pakistani citizens, were forcibly taken away and unlawfully confined at the Illegal Foreigners Holding Point, whereas the official record demonstrates that their custody arose in the course of proceedings undertaken pursuant to the Federal Government’s Illegal Foreigners Repatriation Plan (IFRP), the Notification dated 30.10.2023 issued under the Foreigners Act, 1946, and the subsequent

Government of Sindh Notification dated 30.03.2025 establishing the Government College of Technology, SITE, Karachi as a designated holding point.

6.The record shows that the concerned authorities did not pass a final order of deportation against alleged Foreigners at the stage of their transfer. Rather, pursuant to the proceedings of the District Implementation/Intelligence Committee, Mirpurkhas, dated 31.07.2026, they were transferred to the designated holding point for further screening, verification of nationality and completion of the prescribed legal formalities by the competent authorities, including NADRA and FIA. Prima facie, such exercise seems to be under statutory and administrative framework and for the limited purpose of determining the legal status of the persons concerned, and cannot automatically be equated with unlawful confinement as portrayed. However, this issue needs to be looked into by the competent authority/Court having jurisdiction under the law.

7.The contention that the detenues are Pakistani citizens by birth, however, is a matter which cannot be finally determined merely based on the assertion made in the constitutional petition, for the reason that citizenship is a question of fact and law requiring examination of the relevant record and verification by the competent authorities. Significantly, the proceedings of the DLC prima facie show that the nationality and identity of the persons concerned were specifically examined. The Committee considered their statements and available documents and, in the case of those who failed to satisfactorily establish their Pakistani nationality or the genuineness of their identity documents, formed an assessment that they were Afghan nationals. Such an administrative assessment, particularly when followed by a direction for further screening and verification by the competent federal authorities, cannot be said to be without basis; however, they are required to be produced before the concerned court for such purposes, if the verification process prolongs, to ascertain their Pakistani nationality or the genuineness of their identity documents

8.The very order forwarding the persons to the holding point makes it clear that further verification by the competent Screening Committee/Federal authorities, including NADRA and FIA, was contemplated before any repatriation or deportation. Therefore, the authorities are under a corresponding obligation to examine, fairly and objectively, any genuine claim of Pakistani citizenship supported by valid documentary material and to afford the concerned person an opportunity to produce such material before taking any final step affecting his status or removal from Pakistan subject to all just exceptions as provided under the law, however it is made clear that no Pakistani citizen shall be repatriated under the garb of such powers based on such temporary assessment verification, which shall be avoided in case the process takes time they must be produced before the competent Court in terms of Article 10 of the constitution subject to

exceptions provided under the law. An excerpt of Article 10 of the Constitution is reproduced as under:-

“10. Safeguards as to arrest and detention. (1) No person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest, nor shall he be denied the right to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice.

(2)Every person who is arrested and detained in custody shall be produced before a magistrate within a period of twenty-four hours of such arrest, excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the court of the nearest magistrate, and no such person shall be detained in custody beyond the said period with out the authority of a magistrate.

(3)Nothing in clauses (1) and (2) shall apply to any person who is arrested or detained under any law providing for preventive detention.

(4)No law providing for preventive detention shall be made except to deal with persons acting in a manner prejudicial to the integrity, security or defence of Pakistan or any part thereof, or external affairs of Pakistan, or public order, or the maintenance of supplies or services, and no such law shall authorise the detention of a person for a period exceeding [three months] unless the appropriate Review Board has, after affording him an opportunity of being heard in person, reviewed his case and reported, before the expiration of the said period, that there is, in its opinion, sufficient cause for such detention, and, if the detention is continued after the said period of [three months], unless the appropriate Review Board has reviewed his case and reported, before the expiration of each period of three months, that there is, in its opinion, sufficient cause for such detention.

Explanation I.— In this Article, " the appropriate Review Board" means,

(i)in the case of a person detained under a Federal law, a Board appointed by the Chief Justice of [Supreme Court of] Pakistan and consisting of a Chairman and two other persons, each of whom is or has been a Judge of the Supreme Court or a High Court; and

(ii)in the case of a person detained under a Provincial law, a Board appointed by the Chief Justice of the High Court concerned and consisting of a Chairman and two other persons, each of whom is or has been a Judge of a High Court. Explanation II.—The opinion of a Review Board shall be expressed in terms of the views of the majority of its members.

(5)When any person is detained in pursuance of an order made under any law providing for preventive detention, the authority making the order shall, [within fifteen days] from such detention, communicate to such person the grounds on which the order has been made, and shall afford him the earliest opportunity of making a representation against the order:

Provided that the authority making any such order may refuse to disclose facts which such authority considers it to be against the public interest to disclose.

(6)The authority making the order shall furnish to the appropriate Review Board all documents relevant to the case unless a certificate, signed by a Secretary to the Government concerned, to the effect that it is not in the public interest to furnish any documents, is produced.

(7)Within a period of twenty-four months commencing on the day of his first detention in pursuance of an order made under a law providing for preventive detention, no person shall be detained in pursuance of any such order for more than a total period of eight months in the case of a person detained for acting in a manner prejudicial to public order and twelve months in any other case: Provided that this clause shall not apply to any person who is employed by, or works for, or acts on instructions received from, the enemy [, or who is acting or attempting to act in a manner prejudicial to the integrity, security or defence of Pakistan or any part thereof or who commits or attempts to commit any act which amounts to an anti-national activity as defined in a Federal law or is a member of any association which has for its objects, or which indulges in, any such anti national activity].

(8)The appropriate Review Board shall determine the place of detention of the person detained and fix a reasonable subsistence allowance for his family.

(9)Nothing in this Article shall apply to any person who for the time being is an enemy alien.”

9.The jurisdiction under Section 491 Cr.P.C. is intended to secure release from illegal or improper detention. In the present case, the alleged detenues’ custody originated from an identifiable governmental process under the Foreigners Act, 1946 and the IFRP. Sections 3(1), 3(2)(c), (d), (e)(i)(ii) and (g), 4, 9, 11 and 12 confer powers to regulate foreigners’ presence and movement, arrest and detain them, prescribe places of detention, enforce such orders and delegate powers. In contrast, Section 9 places the burden upon the person concerned to establish that he is not a foreigner. The record shows that the alleged detenues were individually examined by the District Level Implementation Committee, failed prima facie to establish Pakistani nationality, and were transferred under police escort to the designated Illegal Foreigners Holding Point for verification, screening and completion of formalities. Such temporary custody, pursuant to lawful orders under the Act and IFRP/SOPs, cannot be termed unauthorized merely because nationality is disputed, provided the detention remains limited to the period reasonably necessary for verification. It is not converted into indefinite or arbitrary confinement. An excerpt of Sections 3(1), 3(2)(c), (d), (e)(i)(ii) and (g), 4, 9, 11 and 12 are reproduced as under: - “3. Powers to make orders.– (1) The Federal Government may by orders make provision either generally or with respect to all foreigners or with respect to any particular foreigner or any prescribed Class or description of foreigner, for prohibiting, regulating or restricting the entry of foreigners into Pakistan, or their departure there from or their presence or continued therein.

(2)In particular and without prejudice to be generality of the foregoing power, order made under this section may provide that the foreigner:–

(c)shall not remain in Pakistan, or in any prescribed area therein;

(d)shall remove himself to, and remain in, such area in Pakistan as may be prescribed;

(e)shall comply with such conditions as may be prescribed or specified;

(i)requiring him to reside in a particular place;

(ii)imposing any restrictions on his movements;

(g)shall be arrested and, in the interest of the defence or the external affairs or the security of Pakistan, or any part thereof, detained or confined.

4.Internees.– (1) Any foreigner (hereinafter referred to as internee) in respect of whom there is in force any order made under clause (g) of sub-section (2) of section 3, directing that he be detained, or confined, shall be detained or confined in such place and manner and subject to such conditions as to maintenance, discipline and the punishment of offences and breaches of discipline as the Federal Government may from time to time determine.

(2)Any foreigner (hereinafter referred to as a person on parole) in respect of whom there is in force an order under clause (e) of sub-section (2) of section 3 requiring him to reside at a place set apart for the residence under supervision of a number of foreigners, shall while residing therein be subject to such conditions as to maintenance discipline and the punishment of offence and breaches of discipline as the Federal Government may from time to time by order determine.

(3)No person shall:–

(a)knowingly assist an internee or a person on a parole to escape from custody or the place set apart for his residence, or knowingly harbour an escaped internee or person on parole, or

(b)give an escaped internee or a person on parole any assistance with intent thereby to prevent, hinder on interfere with apprehension of the internee or the person on parole.

(4)The Federal Government may by order provide for regulating access to, and the conduct of persons in, places in Pakistan where internees or persons on parole are detained or restricted as the case may be and for prohibiting or regulating the dispatch or conveyance from outside such places to or for internees or persons on parole therein of such articles as may be prescribed.

9.Burden of proof.– lf in any case not falling under Section 8 any question arises with reference to this Act or any order made or direction given there under, whether any person is or is not a foreigner of a particular class or description the onus of proving that such person is not a foreigner or is not a foreigner of such particular class or description, as the case may be, shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Evidence Act, 1872, lie upon such person.

11.Power to give effect to orders, directions etc.– (1) Any authority was powered by or under or in pursuance of the provisions of this Act to give any direction or to exercise any other power, may in addition to any other action expressly provided for in this Act, take or cause to be taken such steps and use, or cause to be used, such force as may, in its opinion, be reasonably necessary for securing compliance with such direction or for preventing or rectifying any breach thereof, or for the effective exercise of such power, as the case may be.

(2)Any police officer may take such steps and use force as may, in his opinion, be reasonably necessary for securing compliance with any order made or direction given under or in pursuance of the provisions of this Act or for preventing or rectifying any breach of such order or direction.

(3)The power conferred by this section shall be deemed to confer upon any person acting in exercise thereof a right of access to any land or other property whatsoever.

12.Power to delegate authority.– Any authority upon which any power to make or give any direction, consent or permission or to do any other act is conferred by this Act or by any order made thereunder may, unless express provision is made to the contrary, in writing authorise conditionally or otherwise, any authority subordinate to it to exercise such power on its behalf, and thereupon the said subordinate authority shall, subject to such conditions as may be contained in the authorization, be deemed to be the authority upon which such power is conferred by or under the Act.”

10.Once the official record identifies the authority and proceedings pursuant to which the alleged foreigners were taken into custody and subsequently transferred to the designated holding point, the allegation of abduction or unauthorized confinement requires independent and credible material to be submitted before the competent authority/court for such relief that could be granted. No such material has been demonstrated in the present record to attract Article 199 of the Constitution; however, such verification process needs to be completed under the statutory law, and the process takes time, and the alleged foreigners are required to be produced before the competent Court for the aforesaid purposes.

11.As regards the prayer for handing over custody of the alleged foreigners to the petitioner at this stage, no vested right of private custody has been established. The petitioner’s relationship with the alleged detenues, even if accepted, does not confer upon him a legal entitlement to obtain their custody where the State is exercising custody under the statutory and administrative mechanism as discussed supra for verification of their nationality and immigration status. However, the appropriate course is for the competent authorities to complete the verification process expeditiously and, if the detenues establish before the competent/authority

court that they are Pakistani citizens, to release them from the repatriation process and take all consequential steps permissible under law.

12.The prayer for unblocking the CNICs also cannot be granted mechanically in constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 of the constitution merely because the petitioner asserts that the alleged detenues are Pakistani citizens. The status of identity documents is intrinsically connected with the verification of identity and nationality. NADRA, being the competent authority, is required to examine the relevant record in accordance with law. However, at this stage NADRA asserts that they have cancelled their documents, such authority cannot keep a citizen’s identity blocked indefinitely or use the blocking of a CNIC as a substitute for a lawful determination of nationality and if they have cancelled the documents if any then if the detenues produce genuine and verifiable evidence establishing their Pakistani citizenship, NADRA and the concerned authorities shall consider their case strictly in accordance with the applicable law and pass a reasoned decision.

13.The Foreigners Act, 1946 and the executive instructions issued pursuant thereto must be implemented consistently with the Constitution, particularly the guarantees of due process and protection of life and liberty. Consequently, no person claiming to be a Pakistani citizen can be repatriated merely based on suspicion, ethnicity, language, appearance or an unverified administrative assumption. Before any final deportation/repatriation order is acted upon, the competent authority must complete the prescribed verification and consider the documentary and other material produced by the concerned person.

14.The record presently before us, however, establishes that the alleged detenues were not ordered to be deported merely through the DLC proceedings. They were transferred to the designated holding point for further screening and verification. The transfer order, if contemplated, proper custody, formal handing/taking-over, and subsequent compliance reporting and it takes time they must be produced before the competent authority /court for extension of the holding, being only foreigners. The petitioner’s apprehension that the alleged detenues may ultimately be deported without verification; if this is the position of the case, this court directs the competent authorities to strictly adhere to the statutory framework and the prescribed SOPs.

15.It is also relevant that the record placed before us refers to proceedings concerning seven persons, whereas the instant petition concerns three detenues. To the extent that the three detenues are amongst the persons covered by the DLC proceedings, their individual identity, nationality and supporting documents shall be separately examined by the competent authority within two weeks, each alleged detainee’s case must stand on its own documentary and factual record to

be assessed by the competent authority. An excerpt of the minutes of DLC held on 31.7.2026 is reproduced as under: -

“During the operation, eight (08) suspected Afghan nationals were apprehended. It was reported that seven (07) individuals were found carrying Pakistani Computerized National Identity Cards (CNICs), whereas one (01) individual possessed no CNIC. The complete particulars of all eight persons were placed before the Committee for consideration details are as under:

1.Ejaz-ul-Haq s/o Zia-ul-Haq Pathan, House No. 254, Anar Gali No. 9, Block-7, Qaidabad, Zafar Town, Landhi, Malir, Karachi. CNIC No. 42101-1893223-2-9.

2.Nadeem Khan s/o Abdul Malik, Sector-A, Mangal Bazar, Shah Latif Town, Karachi. CNIC:

Nil. Approximate age: 25-26 years. During detailed verification and interrogation, he was found to be an Afghan national.

3.Akbar Khan s/o Gul Khan, Faizan-e-Madina, House No. 50, Street No. 03, Jugnu Town, Mirpurkhas. CNIC: Nil.

4.Muhammad Arif s/o Ghazi Khan, House No. 5, Scheme No. 2, Satellite Town, Mirpurkhas. CNIC No. 44103-9871451-9.

5.Zakir s/o Daulat Khan, House No. 6, Street No. 4, Mohalla Lal Chandabad, Mirpurkhas. CNIC No. 44103-1306037-7.

6.Abdul Karim s/o Ayub Khan, House No. 129, near Rehmani Mosque, Rahim Nagar, Mirpurkhas.

7.Muhammad Zubair s/o Fazal-ur-Rehman, Jugnu Town, Mirpurkhas. CNIC No. 44103-4724592-3.

8.Nasrullah s/o Ghazi Khan, Katchi Abadi, Scheme No. 2, Satellite Town, Mirpurkhas. CNIC No. 44103-6678406-9..

The Chair directed that all the apprehended individuals be produced before the District Intelligence Committee. Accordingly, the concerned Police Station presented all eight persons before the Committee.

The Committee conducted an individual hearing of each person and thoroughly examined their statements and responses. Detailed questioning was carried out by the Committee members to determine their identity, nationality and legal status.

After detailed deliberations, examination of the available record, it was observed that none of the Seven except Ejaz-ul-Haq s/o Zia-ul-Haq Pathan, House No. 254, Anar Gali No. 9, Block-7, Qaidabad, Zafar Town, Landhi, Malir, Karachi. CNIC No. 42101-1893223-2-9 individuals could satisfactorily establish or prove Pakistani nationality in accordance with the prescribed Government SOPs and legal requirements. During the proceedings, they also failed to provide convincing answers regarding their Pakistani identity. It was further noted that the all of these individuals belonged to District Zoob and were, on the basis of available and verification, assessed to be Afghan nationals. After extensive discussion and unanimous consensus, the District Intelligence Committee resolved that the said seven (07) individuals could not be recognized as Pakistani nationals and should be treated as Afghan nationals for the purpose of further legal proceedings.

The Committee further resolved that the said seven (07) individuals be handed over to the Holding Point at Karachi, where the designated Screening Committee comprising the competent authorities shall conduct further verification and complete all legal formalities in accordance with the applicable Government policy, law, and prescribed SOPs. Thereafter, necessary action, including repatriation/deportation in accordance with law, shall be undertaken by the competent authorities in order to safeguard public safety and maintain law and order.

The Committee also decided that the case of Mr. Ejaz-ul-Haq alias Sana Zia-ul- Haq Pathan, whose present residential address falls within Karachi and who produced certain supporting documents in support of his claim of Pakistani nationality, be referred to the District Intelligence Committee (DIC), Karachi, through the competent authority for detailed verification and scrutiny of the documents so as to ascertain the genuineness of his claim before any further action is taken. The worthy Deputy Commissioner appreciated the coordinated efforts of the Police, CTD, Intelligence Bureau, Special Branch, NADRA and all other participating agencies for successfully conducting the operation. He observed that, keeping in view the prevailing security situation in the country, such

coordinated intelligence-based operations are essential for ensuring lasting peace, strengthening national security and preventing any compromise on law and order.

The Committee also decided to direct the DSP Satellite Town, Mirpurkhas, the Assistant Commissioner, Mirpurkhas, and the Municipal Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Mirpurkhas, to conduct a comprehensive inquiry into the residential addresses of the above mentioned individuals within Mirpurkhas, including verification of their places of residence, properties, relatives, and business activities, in accordance with the applicable Government policy, rules, and prescribed SOPs. The inquiry shall also ascertain the period of their stay, the ownership or tenancy status of the premises, and any other relevant facts considered necessary. The concerned officers were further directed to submit a comprehensive inquiry report before the District Intelligence Committee, Mirpurkhas, for further consideration and necessary action.”

16.In view of the foregoing discussion, we find no sufficient ground to hold that the impugned order dated 07.08.2026 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Karachi-West, suffers from any illegality or jurisdictional defect warranting interference under Article 199 of the Constitution. An excerpt of order dated 07.08.2026 is reproduced as under: -

“6. In the present case, the petitioner has not placed on record any conclusive material to establish that the alleged detainees are Pakistani nationals except for CNICs, which, admittedly, are under suspension. It appears that the nationality status of the alleged detainees is presently under verification by the competent authorities, including NADRA, and no final determination has yet been made in this regard.

7.It further transpires from the record that the alleged detainees have been kept in the holding facility/Afghan Camp near Ghani Chowrangi, SITE Area, Karachi, as part of a structured administrative process initiated by the State for verification of their nationality and, where required, their repatriation in accordance with law. In such circumstances, where the custody of the alleged detainees is connected with an ongoing lawful administrative process and no mala fide, arbitrariness, or patent illegality has been established, such custody cannot be termed unlawful per se. Any interference by this Court at this stage would amount to pre-empting the due process being undertaken by the competent authorities.

8.In view of the foregoing discussion, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner has failed to establish that the alleged detainees are under unlawful or illegal detention. Consequently, the instant petition, being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed.

17.Nevertheless, to ensure that the lawful process does not result in arbitrary deprivation of liberty or wrongful repatriation of a Pakistani citizen, the competent authorities, particularly NADRA, FIA and the concerned Screening Committee, are directed to complete the verification of the nationality and identity of each of the three alleged detenues expeditiously and strictly in accordance with law, after considering all genuine documentary material produced on their behalf. If any of the alleged detenues is found to be a Pakistani citizen, he shall not be subjected to repatriation as an illegal foreign national and his case shall be dealt with in accordance with law, including consideration of restoration/unblocking of his CNIC by the competent authority. Conversely, if a detainee is conclusively found to be a foreign national having no lawful basis to remain in Pakistan, further proceedings may be undertaken strictly in accordance with the Foreigners Act, 1946 and the applicable notifications/SOPs.

18.Subject to the above directions and safeguards, the constitutional petition is dismissed as being without sufficient grounds for interference under Article 199 of the Constitution. The respondents shall, however, ensure that the alleged

detenues are not subjected to any coercive or punitive treatment beyond what is authorized by law and that any further action concerning their repatriation/deportation is taken only after completion of the prescribed verification and legal formalities.

19.The petition is accordingly disposed of in the above terms.

JUDGE

JUDGE

Zahid/*