ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) Wednesday issued notices to the federal government seeking its response to a constitutional petition challenging the vires of Domestic Violence Prevention and Protection Act 2026.

A single bench of IHC comprising Arbab Muhammad Tahir heard a petition of Advocate Abdul Wahab Farid who contended that the new law is ultra vires the Constitution.

During the hearing, the petitioner was represented by lawyers Maham Fatima Advocate and Sardar Tariq Hussain Advocate who argued that the law contradicted Islamic teachings and undermined fundamental rights guaranteed in the Constitution.

The contended that the Domestic Violence Act 2026 is flawed on multiple grounds, and the law’s provisions are in direct conflict with several articles of the Constitution, including Articles 4 (Right of individuals to be dealt with in accordance with law), 8 (Laws inconsistent with or in derogation of fundamental rights to be void), 10-A (Right to fair trial), 35 (Protection of family), and 227 (Provisions relating to the Holy Quran and Sunnah).

They stated that the procedure for registering and redressing complaints under this law violates the fundamental right to a fair trial as guaranteed by Article 10-A and the principles of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The lawyer further submitted that the law suffers from vague and ambiguous definitions, which create legal uncertainty. He argued that the lack of clear definitions makes the law prone to misuse and is contrary to the well-established principle of legal certainty required for any penal legislation.

He further said that the definitions are unclear and uncertain, leaving room for multiple interpretations, which is dangerous for the dispensation of justice. The petitioners maintained that the Act, in its current form, is not only in conflict with the Constitution but also repugnant to the injunctions of Islam, as enshrined in the Constitution.

After hearing the initial arguments, the IHC bench issued notices to the Federation of Pakistan, the Secretaries of the Ministry of Law and Justice and the Ministry of Human Rights to submit their replies on the points raised in the petition.

Later, the court deferred hearing of the case until April 16.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2026