2006 PLP 2946 (YLR)
Mst. IRSHAD BIBI — Petitioner Versus S.H.O., P.S. R.A. BAZAR, RAWALPINDI and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2006 PLP 2946 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Akhtar Shabbir, J |
| Parties | Mst. IRSHAD BIBI — Petitioner Versus S.H.O., P.S. R.A. BAZAR, RAWALPINDI and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 2946 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 2946 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Akhtar Shabbir, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 2946 (YLR) (Mst. IRSHAD BIBI — Petitioner Versus S.H.O., P.S. R.A. BAZAR, RAWALPINDI and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Fazal-ur-Rehman Khattak for Petitioner.
- Ms. Nasreen Akhtar for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 491
Relationship of wife and husband existed between the parties
Son of the petitioner was two years old
Mother was entitled to the custody (Hizanat) of her male child until he had completed the age of seven years
Petitioner mother could look after the child in a better way than his father or other relations
Minor was given in the interim custody of the petitioner in circumstances till the final adjudication by the Guardian Judge, if any party approached that forum
Petition was accepted accordingly. Mahomedan Law by Mulla, S.352 ref. Nasir Saeed Sheikh, D.A.-G. along with Colonel Iqbal Hashmi
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AKHTAR SHABBIR, J.
This habeas petition has been filed by the petitioner for the recovery of her minor son namely Mohsin Masih aged about two years from the custody of respondents Nos.2 and
3. The service upon the said, respondents have been effected through Army Authorities, who in compliance with the order of this Court have produced the detenu in this Court.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the minor child cannot be deprived of the love and affection of lap of his mother. He further contended that this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under section 491, Cr.P.C., even during the pendency of guardianship matter of the minor before the Guardian Judge, can pass appropriate order. He lastly contended that the mother has preference over the father for the custody of minor child till he attains the age of puberty.
3. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
4. The relationship of wife and husband between the petitioner and respondent No.2 Akram Masih is still in existence. It is admitted position that Mohsin Masih the minor son of the petitioner, is aged about 2 years and in accordance with section 352 of the Mahomedan Law, the mother is entitled to the custody (Hizanat) of her male child until he has completed the age of 7 years and to the custody of her female child until she has attained the puberty. It is settled preposition of law that the mother can look after the minor detenu in a better way than father or the other relations.
5. Keeping in view the age of the minor and following the dictum laid down by the superior Court, this habeas petition is accepted and the interim custody of the minor/detenu is entrusted to the petitioner till the final adjudication by the Guardian Judge, if any party approaches that forum. N.H.Q./I-110/L?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition accepted.