The Islamabad High Court, in a landmark judgment authored by Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir and Justice Inaam Ameen Minhas , has held that the National Cyber Crimes Investigation Agency (NCCIA) acted without lawful authority by directing commercial banks to freeze citizens’ bank accounts. The decision came in a set of consolidated Intra-Court Appeals including Muhammad Uzair Anwar and others v. Federation of Pakistan and others, where several individuals challenged the freezing of their accounts by the NCCIA.
Background of the Case. The appellants—represented by Barrister Abdul Qadeer, Barrister Abdul Ahad Khokher, Mr. Muhammad Fiaz Kandwal, and Barrister Mian Ali Ashfaq—had earlier filed writ petitions against the NCCIA’s move to freeze their bank accounts on allegations of uploading anti-state content and selling sensitive information abroad. A learned Single Judge had dismissed those petitions, leading to the filing of these Intra-Court Appeals.On behalf of the respondents, Mr. Asif Jadoon, Assistant Attorney General, and Mr. Wasi Ullah Khan, counsel for the Bank of Punjab, defended the NCCIA’s actions.
Court’s Observations.The Court conducted an in-depth examination of the legislative framework governing the NCCIA and observed that after the enactment of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes (Amendment) Act, 2025, the NCCIA became an independent investigative body. As such, it ceased to be a subordinate wing of the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) and could no longer invoke Section 5(5) of the FIA Act, 1974, which empowers FIA officers to freeze property temporarily during investigations.The bench further noted that while the NCCIA derived its authority from the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016 (PECA), this law did not authorize the agency to freeze or attach property or bank accounts. The Court found that Rule 5 of the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (Function) Rules, 2025, which purported to grant such powers, was framed beyond the legislative intent of the parent statute and thus ultra vires.
Violation of Constitutional and Statutory Safeguards. The Court held that the NCCIA bypassed the mandatory procedure under the Anti-Money Laundering Act, 2010, which requires judicial approval before attaching or freezing any property. Acting unilaterally, the agency deprived the appellants and their families of access to their financial assets—an act the Court deemed harsh, disproportionate, and unconstitutional.The judgment emphasized that freezing citizens’ accounts without notice or inquiry violated fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 4, 10A, 19, 23, and 24 of the Constitution, including the rights to due process, fair trial, property, and livelihood.
Outcome of the Case. Setting aside the Single Judge’s decision, the Islamabad High Court allowed the Intra-Court Appeals and ordered the authorities to unfreeze the appellants’ bank accounts forthwith. The NCCIA was directed to continue its inquiries strictly in accordance with law and not to overstep its statutory limits.
Legal Significance. This judgment clarifies that investigative agencies cannot expand their powers through subordinate legislation. The NCCIA, being a creation of the 2016 Act, must operate within its defined boundaries. The ruling reinforces the principle that executive agencies are subject to the rule of law and cannot infringe upon fundamental rights under the guise of investigation.
