Principle of Policy

2025 PLD 1 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Ss. 2(a) & 2(b) [as amended/substituted by the Punjab Child Marriage Restraint (Amendment) Act, 2015]Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 35Child marriagePrinciple of policyState to protect marriage, the family, the mother and the child'Child', definition ofDistinction drawn on the basis of gender while providing different ages for males and females

Constitutionality definition of 'child' given in S. 2(a) and (b) of the Act 1929 means a person who if a male is under 18 years of age and if a female is under 16 years of age and the punishments have been accordingly given in S. 4 of the Act 1929

Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929, (and its amendments) is a step towards fulfilment of duty by the State under Art. 35 of Constitution which provides that "The State shall protect the marriage, the family, the mother and the child"; it specifically mentions the mother and not the father

It is of crucial importance to protect marriage, the family, the mother and the child to put a restraint on child marriage yet the centre of the family, the mother, has been grossly discriminated which undermines the cogency of the constitutional scheme

It is essential for the protection of family (with the mother and the child as its more important elements) to protect a female from being subjected to child marriage

The mandate of Art. 35 was not lost on the legislature while enacting the Act 1929

But, for some reason which cannot be discerned, unmistakable partisan slant has muddled the clear stream of policy objectives animating the 2015 amendments

The difference in ages in the definition of 'child' was left unchanged in the 2015 amendments, which does not comport with the mandate of Art. 25 of Constitution

Thus, the definition of child, in its present form, in the 1929 Act is discriminatory

Words in S. 2(a) of 1929 Act that "if a male ….and if a female is under sixteen years of age" being unconstitutional were held to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect; and were struck down

High Court directed the Govt. of Punjab (its relevant department) to issue the revised version of the 1929 Act within the next fifteen days and also upload that version on its website for information

Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly.

2000 PLC(CS) 784 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Art. 3 & Chap. 2, Part. 11 [Arts. 29 to 40)Principles of policyNon-payment of salary to employee for work doneValiditySuch act is violative of principles of policy contained in Chap. 2, Part 11 of the Constitution

Article 3 of the Constitution casts duty on the State to eliminate all forms of exploitation.

2000 PLC(CS) 349 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Part II, Chap.2 [Arts. 29 to 40], Arts.274 & 199Constitutional petitionPrinciples of PolicyLiabilities and obligations of GovernmentApplicabilityStopping of he hereditary political pension

Such pension was granted in favour of grandfather of petitioner which continued to be paid by the successive Governments from time to time and as such remained to be the duty and Constitutional obligation of the Federal Government

Such obligation and commitment must be honored to consolidate public confidence in the commitments made by the Government and the same could not be ignored and overlooked

Non-fulfilment of liabilities and obligations

1981 SCMR 341 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Art.29 & 32 Local Government institutions-Principles of Policy

Observance and implementation of President and Governors, in respect of their respective jurisdictions being bound to get prepared and laid before Legislature a report on observance and implementation of Principles of Policy, citizens could assist authorities in formulating such a scheme, in giving it a form and substance and in advocating its adoption-Citizens, held, could, consistently with their right, approach public direct to obtain aeceprability and support for such scheme.