The Lahore High Court on Thursday delivered an MPO Ordinance plea dismissal, rejecting a petition that challenged the constitutional validity of sections 3 and 5 of the law that allows preventive detention in Punjab. Justice Abher Gul Khan held the case was not maintainable.
The petition was filed by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leaders Ejaz Shafi, Imtiaz Mahmood and others. It targeted provisions of the Maintenance of Public Order (MPO) Ordinance—the provincial rules under which officials can detain someone to prevent a breach of public order.
Why the court closed the case
Justice Khan noted that a high court larger bench had already decided a related preventive-detention matter. She also asked whether the new petition should itself go to a larger bench.
Advocate Azhar Siddique, for the petitioners, argued that different individuals had filed this case and that it directly attacked the constitutional standing of the disputed sections. He said those questions still needed judicial scrutiny even after the earlier ruling.
A government law officer opposed further hearings because of that larger-bench judgment and asked for heavy costs against the petitioners. Siddique resisted costs and said the fresh petition raised distinct constitutional points. He asked the court to call for a government report on whether the previous judgment had been carried out. After hearing both sides, Justice Khan dismissed the petition as not maintainable—an outcome that crystallises the MPO Ordinance plea dismissal for this set of challengers.
What counsel said about liberty and earlier orders
Assailing the MPO Ordinance law, Siddique told the court that officials’ power to curb a citizen’s liberty cannot be open-ended. He said it must stay within the Constitution, fundamental rights and statutory safeguards.
He also pointed to a June 19, 2025 larger-bench decision in a petition by Zainab Umair and others. That bench, he said, had sent the matter to the law secretary for needed legal steps. Despite several letters to the authorities, he argued, there had been no effective progress. He urged the court to check whether that earlier decision had been implemented and what legal measures had followed.
What remains unchanged
With the MPO Ordinance plea dismissal in place, sections 3 and 5 of Punjab’s preventive-detention framework were not struck down in this hearing. The court’s finding that the petition was not maintainable means this challenge did not reopen the constitutional fight over those clauses before a single judge, given the earlier larger-bench path.
Aasan alfaaz mein
Lahore High Court ne MPO Ordinance ke sections 3 aur 5 ke khilaf darkhwast kharij kar di hai. Yeh qanoon Punjab mein preventive detention—yaani pehle se nazar bandi—se mutaliq hai. Adalat ne kaha ke pehle bhi bari bench is masle par faisla kar chuki hai, is liye yeh case qabil-e-samat nahi. Ab in sections ko is darkhwast se challenge nahi kiya gaya, lekin qanoon pehle jaisa hi kaam karta rahega.
