YLR 2006

2006 PLP 3055 (YLR)

Mst. NEELAM LADHANI — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT POLICE OFFICER, MULTAN and 7 others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Writ Petition No.2166 of 2006, decided on 17th May, 2006.
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Sayeed Akhtar, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2006 PLP 3055 (YLR)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Muhammad Sayeed Akhtar, J
Parties Mst. NEELAM LADHANI — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT POLICE OFFICER, MULTAN and 7 others — Respondents
Primary Law Constitution of Pakistan (1973)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 3055 (YLR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 3055 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Sayeed Akhtar, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 3055 (YLR) (Mst. NEELAM LADHANI — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT POLICE OFFICER, MULTAN and 7 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)

Representation

  • Sardar Balakh Sher Khosa for Petitioner.
  • Qazi Saddar-ud-Din Alvi for Respondent No.8 along with respondent No.8.

Headnotes / Summary

Arts. 35 & 199

Constitutional petition

Protection to marriage and family of petitioner

Petitioner, a Hindu girl who was 'Sui Juris' aged 21 years, had embraced Islam of her own accord and she solemnized marriage with a Muslim at place 'K'

Father of petitioner, who was an influential person, was constantly illegally harassing her and her husband, who migrated to place 'M' which was place of abode of her husband

Notice was issued to father of petitioner and a meeting between petitioner and her father was arranged for more than one hour

Petitioner stated that she wanted to live with her husband and did not want to go with her father

Petitioner had made said statement free from any pressure or duress

Girl had contracted marriage of her own free volition and also embraced Islam after due deliberation

High Court was bound to protect marriage of petitioner under Art. 35 of the Constitution

High Court directed the D.P.O. place 'M' to provide protection to petitioner in all respects. Muhammad Qasim Khan, A.A.-G. with Muneer Ahmad Chishti, D.P.O. Multan Ehtesham Hussain, D.S.P. and Maqbool Ahmad, Inspector/S. H .O. P.S. Gulgusht.

Judgment & Decree

MUHAMMAD SAYEED AKHTAR, J.

Contends that the petitioner is `sui juris' aged about 21 years. She embraced Islam of her own accord and after due deliberation, thereafter she solemnized marriage with one Amjad Shahzad, at Karachi. This was a hard shell to swallow for the family of the petitioner particularly her father. Their life was in danger at Karachi as such they migrated to Multan (the place of abode of her husband). The father of the petitioner is Additional Commissioner Income Tax and is an influential person and is constantly illegally harassing her and her husband. The respondents 1 to 7 at his instance are also constantly interfering in her matrimonial life and pressurizing her to get the marriage dissolved and the revert to her ancestral religion.

2. I had issued notices to the father of the petitioner/respondent No.8 and the D.P.O. Multan, who are present. A meeting between the petitioner and her father was arranged for more than one hour. The petitioner states that she wants to live with her husband and does not want to go with her father. She further stated that the lives of her husband and herself are in danger, she is receiving threatening .telephonic calls. M.N.As. and M.P.As. are also pressurizing her to go back to her father. The D.P.O. Multan, present in person, states that he will provide protection to the petitioner provided she supplies address of her residence to him.

3. The petitioner is sui juris and has made the above statement free from any pressure or duress. The father was provided an opportunity of meeting her daughter for more than one hour but the petitioner remain consistent. She has contracted marriage of her own free volition and also embraced Islam after due deliberation, this Court is bound to protect the marriage under Article 35 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.

4. In view of the above the D.P.O. Multan is directed to provide protection to the petitioner in all respects. With this direction petition stands disposed of. H.B.T./N-73/L???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Order accordingly.