1978 PLP 113 (SCMR)

QAISER KHAN J. Mst. Perveen Akhtar was wife of Ghulam Rabbani be two had two cons, namely, Usman Hamid aged 3 and Umer Humid aged

1. Ghulam Rabbani divorced Mst. Perveen Akhtar and a dispute arose between the two over the custody of the children. Ghulam Rabbani filed a petition under section 25 of the Guardians and Wards act before the Guardian judge, Rawalpindi, for the custody of the two children. With lain petition he also filed an application under section 12 of the Act for an interlocutory order for the production and interim protection of the minors. Since the parties had acquired Canadian citizenship as well and owned property in Canada Mat. Perveen Akhtar who was in family way wanted to go to Canada for giving birth to a child there so that the child could get Canadian citizenship. She therefore requested we Court to allow to her to take Umar Hand with her to Canada. In this respect the parries arrived a: a compromise in Court. According of the compromise Mar. Perveen Akhtar was allowed to take Umar Hamid along with her to Canada on the condition that the would produce the child in court after a period of 6 months. For that purpose she had to execute and surety bond in the sum of Rs. 20.000. Muhammad Iqbal furnished the surety bond in the sum of 20,000 on behalf of Mst. Perveen Akhtar on 27‑5‑1976. Mst. Perveen, however, did not produce the child in Court after a period of 6 months and notice that therefore issued to the surety to produce the child in Court. The surety however failed to produce the child. In the meantime best. Perveen Akhtar through her counsel filed an application in that she had to look after her migration in canada which had been started by Ghulam, Rabbani against her there. This application of hers was however rejected by the learned Guardian judge by his order dated 16-3-1977. By the same order the learned judge also forfeited the surety bond as Muhammad Iqbal could not show any reasonable justification for the non-production of the child. Muhammad Iqbal and Perveen Akhrar filed a revision petition against the aforesaid order to the High Court at Lahore but a learned Single Judge by his order dated 9‑5‑1977 dismissed the revision petition In limine. It was under these circumstance that Mst. Perveen Akhtar and Muhammad Iqbal filed this petition for special leave ;o appeal against the aforesaid older of ate High Court. After hearing Mr. M. S. Mohboob, Advocate for the petitioners ewe Lave come to the conclusion that there is no merit whatsoever in this petition The compromise and the execution of the bond could not be denied by the learned counsel and Mst. Perveen Akhtar has not produced the child in Court even up to the present day. The surety bond had therefore rightly been' forfeited and the learned Judge was perfectly justified in dismissing the revision petition. This petition is therefore dismissed. Petition dismissed.