KARACHI: While dismissing a plea seeking directives against the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), a division bench of the Sindh High Court, comprising Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry and Justice Abdul Mobeen Lakho, ruled that the Agency is fully competent to conduct an inquiry into the illicit procurement of restricted chemicals.
Counsels comprising advocates Paras Ali Lodhi and Saddam Hussain Chang invoked the jurisdiction of the Sindh High Court (SHC) on behalf of the petitioner, Pest Management Services (Private) Limited. They urged the court to quash enquiry proceedings initiated by the FIA’s Anti-Corruption Circle. The petitioner contended that the FIA had overstepped its legal mandate by summoning company officers and employees under Section 160 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) for questioning related to business operations.
At the heart of the legal battle was the import of Methyl Bromide, a potent chemical pesticide subject to stringent international and domestic regulatory controls. The petitioner’s counsel built their argument on a jurisdictional technicality, asserting that because the substance is classified as a pesticide, any alleged irregularities should be governed exclusively by the Agricultural Pesticides Ordinance of 1971. Under this logic, the petitioner maintained that the FIA possessed no lawful authority to intervene in a specialized regulatory matter, thereby rendering the ongoing enquiry and subsequent summonses null and void.
However, the proceedings took a sharp turn as the court examined the specific nature of the allegations leveled by the FIA. Representing the Federation of Pakistan and the investigation agency, Deputy Attorney General Ms. Shazia Hanjra and Deputy Director (Legal) Mr. Muhammad Faisal detailed a scheme involving grave criminal deception. The court observed that the FIA’s probe was not merely about the technical classification of a pesticide, but rather centered on the allegation that the petitioner submitted forged documentation to secure import permits. More critically, the investigation suggested the company deliberately concealed that the Methyl Bromide originated from India—a trade strictly prohibited under the Imports and Exports (Control) Act of 1950.
Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry, in authoring the court’s verdict, systematically dismantled the petitioner’s jurisdictional defense. The court clarified that the legal mandate of the FIA is explicitly defined under Section 3 of the Federal Investigation Agency Act, 1974. When read in conjunction with Entry No. 7 of the Schedule to said Act, it is clear the Agency holds primary responsibility for investigating offences punishable under the Imports and Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1950. By focusing on the fraudulent nature of the import process and the violation of trade bans rather than the chemical’s composition, the court found the FIA acted squarely within its statutory powers.
Concluding the hearing on March 25, 2026, the bench ruled that the petitioner’s premise lacked legal force. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, clearing the path for federal investigators to proceed. In a final directive, the court ordered the FIA to complete its enquiry into the alleged forgery and illegal imports with due haste and efficiency. This verdict reinforces the broad investigative reach of the FIA in matters of international trade fraud and the integrity of national import controls.
