QUETTA/KHUZDAR: At least eight suspected terrorists were killed in a clash with the Bugti Peace Force, a pro-government tribal militia, in the Loti area of Dera Bugti district on Saturday, according to police officials.

A policeman who was part of the peace force was martyred and three other members were injured during the clash.

Separately, a tribal leader was killed in the Naal area of Khuzdar and firing was also reported at the residence of Sardar Aslam Bizenjo, a central leader of the National Party, in the same area.

Police officials said that following the clash, the peace force arrested seven suspected terrorists who allegedly belonged to a banned outfit.

Sources said armed men attacked the residence of Dera Bugti District Council Chairman Ghulam Nabi Shambani and a gas company camp in the Loti area of Dera Bugti district with heavy weapons in the early hours of Saturday.

The Bugti Peace Force personnel, who were deployed for the protection of the district council chairman and the gas company camp, took positions and returned fire.

An exchange of fire continued for over an hour, during which heavy weapons, including rockets, were used by both sides. Some attackers were killed in the exchange of fire.

Sources said that after the heavy exchange of fire, some attackers escaped from the site. However, they returned later in the day and again attacked the residence of the Dera Bugti district council chairman, who is close to Balochistan Chief Minister Sarfraz Bugti.

The sources added that eight attackers were killed in the exchange of fire while seven others were arrested by the peace force. Their bodies were shifted to Loti hospital.

“A member of the peace force identified as Fazal Khan lost his life as he suffered multiple bullet injuries,” a police official said.

“Three other members of the peace force, who were injured in the clash, were shifted to a hospital,” he added.

The official said further action and investigation into the incident were underway.

Tribal leader shot dead

Meanwhile, a tribal leader, Sardar Ghulam Nabi Siyahpad, was gunned down by unidentified attackers in the Naal area of Khuzdar district.

Police officials said the attackers, riding motorcycles, opened fire on the tribal leader while he was sitting outside his house in the evening.

He sustained multiple bullet wounds and died at the spot, while the attackers fled.

In a separate incident, unidentified men opened fire at the residence of National Party central leader and former provincial minister Sardar Muhammad Aslam Bizenjo in Naal town, injuring one of his security guards.

“Sardar Bizenjo was not present in the house at the time,” a police officer said.

Police launched investigations into the incidents. No group has so far claimed responsibility for either attack.

The National Party’s Khuzdar district chapter condemned the firing on Sardar Bizenjo’s residence and demanded an immediate, transparent and impartial investigation.

In a statement, the party’s district spokesperson said targeting the residence of a political and tribal leader was a matter of concern and urged the authorities to ensure effective security for Mr Bizenjo, his family and residence.

The National Party expressed solidarity with Mr Bizenjo and his family and prayed for the early recovery of the injured security guard.

Published in Dawn, September 27th, 2026

A spokesman for the Saudi-led coalition said on Saturday its air defences “intercepted and destro­yed two drones launched by the Houthis towards the Riyadh area”.

Saudi air defences also intercepted and destroyed two Houthi-launched ballistic missiles targeting Khamis Mushait, a city in the country’s southwest that is home to an air base, the spokesman said.

Hezam Al-Assad, a member of the Houthi Political Bureau, said on Saturday that “Despite the operation’s strength, scope, and impact, our armed forces view it as merely a small-scale rehearsal for a full-scale escalation.”

Meanwhile, Jasem Mohamed Albudaiwi, secretary general of the Gulf Cooperation Council, denounced the Houthi attacks.

“This dangerous escalation constitutes a flagrant violation of the Kingdom’s sovereignty and poses a direct threat to the security and safety of civilians and the stability of the region,” he said in a statement.

Published in Dawn, September 27th, 2026

Justice Raja Inaam Ameen Minhas, in a detailed judgement, declared the second limb of Rule 22(2)(b) ultra vires the Passports Act, 1974, and Articles 4, 9, 10A and 15 of the Constitution, holding that it was of no legal effect.

The judgement was issued on a petition filed by Moinuddin, who was offloaded at Islamabad International Airport on Dec 18, 2025, while travelling to Saudi Arabia for Umrah. He possessed a valid Pakistani passport, a valid Saudi visa and a confirmed air ticket, but no reason was communicated to him for stopping him from travelling.

The court noted that his passport had never been impounded, confiscated, cancelled or inactivated, nor had its issuance or renewal been refused. The dispute, therefore, centred on the question whether the agency had the authority to restrain a citizen from travelling on a valid passport.

According to the judgement, his name was placed on the PCL on Dec 24, 2024, on the recommendation of NCB-INTERPOL, forwarded by the FIA’s Assistant Director (Immigration Wing). The action followed his deportation from the UK after his conviction for causing death by dangerous driving while under the influence of alcohol. He had served a three-year sentence.

The court noted that he had completed his sentence and been deported, while no criminal case, inquiry or investigation was pending against him in Pakistan. He was neither a proclaimed offender nor the subject of an extradition request.

The IHC rejected the justification provided by the passport authorities to retain his name on the PCL that his conduct had adversely affected Pakistan’s reputation and that the placement was intended to create deterrence.

The court observed that these grounds were not contained in the Passports Act or the Passport Rules. Rule 21 dealt with refusal of a passport and did not authorise restraint of a citizen who already possessed a valid passport, the judgement stated.

“The refusal of a passport and the prohibition of travel are two separate exercises of power,” Justice Minhas observed, declaring that the function of the relevant division and directorate general to “prepare and maintain” the PCL was administrative and did not itself confer jurisdiction to decide whose name could be placed on the list.

The court pointed out that Rule 22(2) referred to individuals whose passport facilities had been refused. Moinuddin had never been refused a passport. It also noted that Rule 22(2)(a) specifically identified the additional secretary of the relevant division as the authority competent to place and remove names in Category A, whereas clause (b) identified no such authority.

The IHC held that neither the directorate general of FIA nor NCB-INTERPOL possessed the authority to place the petitioner’s name on the PCL in the circumstances of the case.

It observed that the impugned order merely stated that it had been issued with the approval of the “competent authority” without identifying that authority, the legal provision invoked or the material on which the decision was based.

The court found that the impugned provision provided no competent authority, objective criteria, notice, hearing, reasons or communication of the decision, meaning that a citizen could learn of the restriction only after being stopped at the immigration counter.

The judgement declared the second limb of Rule 22(2)(b) — allowing PCL placement on the recommendations of government agencies or departments — beyond Sections 8 and 13 of the Passports Act and inconsistent with the Constitution.

About the reasons of “international reputation” and “deterrence”, the court held that since the petitioner had completed his sentence and no proceedings were pending against him, the restraint had no “live and proximate nexus with a present necessity”.

“Gravity does not supply jurisdiction,” it said.

Expressing displeasure over the authorities’ failure to comply with an earlier order, the IHC directed them to decide the petitioner’s application within one week through a speaking and well-reasoned order.

The court consequently set aside the Jan 26, 2026, order of the agency and declared the petitioner’s placement on the PCL on Dec 24, 2024, without lawful authority and of no legal effect.

It directed the authorities to remove his name from the PCL within 15 days of receiving a certified copy of the judgement and not to interfere with his lawful foreign travel on the basis of the impugned placement.

The court clarified that the competent authority could still take action warranted by law after following the prescribed procedure. Copies of the judgement were sent to the Interior Secretary, Immigration and Passports DG and FIA DG for compliance.

Published in Dawn, September 27th, 2026