2016 PLP 1287 (SCMR)
Mst. TANVEER BIBI — Petitioner Versus SHO POLICE STATION MANDI BAHAUDDIN and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2016 PLP 1287 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Gulzar Ahmed and Manzoor Ahmad Malik, JJ |
| Parties | Mst. TANVEER BIBI — Petitioner Versus SHO POLICE STATION MANDI BAHAUDDIN and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2016 PLP 1287 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2016 PLP 1287 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Gulzar Ahmed and Manzoor Ahmad Malik, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2016 PLP 1287 (SCMR) (Mst. TANVEER BIBI — Petitioner Versus SHO POLICE STATION MANDI BAHAUDDIN and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Muhammad Arif, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Ozair Chughtai, Advocate-on-Record (Absent) for Petitioner.
- Malik Amjad Parvez, Senior Advocate Supreme Court along with minors for Respondents Nos.2 - 3.
- Date of hearing: 26th May, 2016.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal against the order dated 12-4-2016 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Crl. Misc. No. 690-H of 2016)
S. 491
Recovery and custody of minor children
Mother of minors alleged that their father was working abroad, and in his absence her in-laws turned her out of the house and also snatched the minors
Minors looked happy and content when they met their mother in court
Nothing had been stated by the in-laws as to why the mother had to leave the house
Minors were of tender age and in the absence of their father, who had gone abroad, the mother was legally entitled to their custody, who was living with her father and brother
Keeping in view the welfare and best interest of the minors their custody was delivered to their mother.
Judgment & Decree
GULZAR AHMED, J.
The petitioner had filed a petition under section 491, Cr.P.C. for recovery and custody of her two minor children namely Muhammad Anas, aged about 6 years and Arooj Fatima, aged about 4 years before the High Court. The High Court through the impugned order dated 12.04.2016 did not allow the petition.
2. The petitioner Mst. Tanveer Bibi is married to Basharat Ali, who is the son of respondent No.2 and brother of respondent No.3. Basharat Ali appears to be employed in Saudi Arabia and has left behind the petitioner and two minor children in the house of his father, respondent No.2 and brother, respondent No.3. It is alleged by the petitioner that she was being maltreated by respondents Nos.2 and 3 and also while snatching her two minor children she was turned out of their house.
3. In compliance to the earlier order of this Court dated 24.05.2016 the minors have been produced before the Court. The petitioner was allowed time to meet her minor children and subsequently when the matter was taken up again both the minors looked quite happy and contented with their mother. Nothing has been stated by respondents Nos.2 and 3 as to why the petitioner had to leave their house. In the circumstances where both the minors are of tender age and in the absence of their father, who has gone abroad, the mother is legally entitled to their custody, who is living with her father and brother. Therefore, keeping in view the welfare and best interest of the minors their custody is delivered to their mother, the petitioner. Consequently, the petition is converted into appeal and allowed in the above terms. MWA/T-3/SC Appeal allowed.