Citation Name: PLJ 2004 Lahore High Court 1535
Appelant Side: UM-A-TAMEEM alias SAMINA BIBI & another
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: S.H.O., POLICE STATION TANDLIANWALA DISTT. FAISALABAD & two others
Judge Name: M. BlLAL KHAN
--s. 7-offence of zina (enforcement of hudood) ordinance 1979 (vii of 1979), ss. 10. 16-constitution of pakistan, 1973-art. 199-offence of zina--quashment of fir-constitutional petition-failure to send notice of talak to chairman union council-effect-petitioner claims that on strength of divorce deed she had contracted valid and legitimate marriage which is perfectly legal-fact that notice of talak was not sent to chairman union council will not render talak ineffective-continuation of proceedings in fir shall not serve any useful purpose and will clearly amount to abuse of process of law-held further: respondent no. 3 if aggrieved may agitate matter before appropriate forum which is judge family court in instant case-petition allowed.
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Peshawar High Court 132
Appelant Side: Mst. JAMILA BANO
Versus
Opponent Side: MIRZA MUHAMMAD and 2 others
Judge Name: MALIK HAMID SAEED AND SHAH JEHAN KHAN,
-art-199~recovery of minor children-learned courts below not only have deprived real mother from custody of minor children on sole ground of poverty but on the other hand have misread evidence wherein it is categorically stated that children in possession of mother are happy and receiving proper education-though minors are studying in government school in 7th class and 4th class respectively but it is also in evidence that father of children is a crane operator in tarbela dam project, who in his meagre pay without any other source of income could not be expected to impart education to children in some high standard educational institutions-hence education of minor children in custody of mother is property going on according to her resources and maintenance allowance which she received from husband for them-moreover, father of minor children has contracted two other marriages and in presence of two step mothers in same house, welfare of minors cannot be stated to be safe than in custody of her real mother-law gives custody of a child which is too young to be independent of own's help in feeding, clothing and like, for boy limit is fixed at 7 years, but right of custody of father is required to be instituted solely for benefit of minor and in absence to that right cannot be conferred on father at all costs-mother is best guardian for her minor children unless it is proved that she has married a man who is not closely related to minor, or she lives a life of open immorality or her occupation by such as to make it difficult for her to look after child properly-all above factors goes in favour of mother-neither she has contracted marriage nor her character and occupation is such that i custody of minors could be refused to her-custody of minors given to mother.
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Peshawar High Court 149
Appelant Side: MUHAMMAD ANWAR
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: TAHIRA JABEEN and 3 others
Judge Name: MALIK HAMID SAEED AND LTAZ-UL-HASSAN,
Judgment Result:Petition dismissed
-s. 5 & sched-constitution of pakistan (1973), art. 199-concept of marriage in islam explained-spouses must live within parameters laid down by islam-parties must separate if those parameters were transgressed-petitioner has contracted second marriage during subsistence of first marriage and was living with his second wife without providing maintenance to his first wife/respondent and daughter-dispute between couple is with regard to 14 tolas of gold which belongs to wife and husband is refusing to return same to her-courts below having decreed respondents-suit to that extent, high court would not interfere with same in exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction.
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Peshawar High Court 329
Appelant Side: MUHAMMAD AAMIR and another
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: Mst. SHABANA NISAR and 2 others
Judge Name: MUHAMMAD QAIM JAN KHAN
Judgment Result:Petition dismissed
--s. 5 & sched.-constitution of pakistan (1973), art. 199-respondent wife's suit for recovery of dower, maintenance and dissolution of marriage decreed by two court's below, assailed-'-evidence on record being on factual matters was thrashed by two courts below-conduct of father of petitioner makes it crystal clear that plot of land was entered in dower deed in nikahnama and subsequently such entry was denied by petitioner while admitted by his father-petitioner did not appear in family court for conciliation proceedings-all such factors does not entitle petitioner to avoid concurrent decree, and judgment of two courts of competent jurisdiction in discretionary jurisdiction of high court, therefore his constitutional petition against the same was dismissed.
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Supreme Court 309
Appelant Side: MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE and another
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: Mst. MANZOORAN BIBI alias SHAHIDA PARVEEN
Judge Name: JAVED IQBAL, KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY AND KARAMAT NAZIR BHANDARI
Judgment Result:Appeal dismissed.
--s. 3--plaintiff granted permission to defendant to contract second marriage on the condition that defendant would continue to pay specified amount per month as maintenance and also transfer one residential room and one shop part of the house-plaintiffs suit was dismissed by two courts below on the ground that agreement in question, was not enforceable as there was no consideration and that the same was violative of s. 27 of contract act, 1872-high court, however, decreed plaintiffs suit on the ground that grant of permission to marry was valid consideration for agreement to transfer specified property-high court had rightly interfered in exercise of revisional jurisdiction-judgment and decree of high court was maintained in the circumstances.
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Cr.C 617
Appelant Side: MUHAMMAD YOUNAS
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: CH. IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN,
Judgment Result:Bail granted.
--s. 497 (2)"bail"further inquiry-offence u/ss. 10/16 offence of zina (enforcement of hudood) ordinance, 1979-allegation against petitioner is that he abetted his co-accused in enticement or taking away a girl and thereafter had also subjected her to zina-bil-jabr-allegea abductee denied allegation of her enticement or zina with her by any one in a affidavit before police-abductee also filed suit for dissolution of marriage against her husband-in the same too, she did not level any allegation of the sort against any one-on police record there are apparently divergent statements in respect of the matter-so, it is yet to be seen that if petitioner had abetted his co-accused in her enticement or taking away or committed zina-bil-jabr with her-petitioner's case covered under sub section (2) of section 497 cr.p.c. requiring further inquiry into his guilt- petitioner was behind bars and stated to be previously non-convict-bail granted in the circumstances.
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Cr.C 642
Appelant Side: WAQAR AHMAD and another
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: M. JAVED BUTTAR
Judgment Result:Pre-arrest bail declined.
-s. 498-bail before arrest-offence u/s. 364/109 ppc--contention that case against petitioners was false, alleged abductee was divorced by petitioner on 19.6.2001 and she went missing, on her own, from \ 20.6.2001 by leaving the house of petitioner-he does not know her whereabouts and the petitioners have been involved falsely by the in-laws of petitioner because he has divorced his former wife; present wife of petitioner has been falsely involved because the petitioner contracted marriage with her against the wishes of his former wife-a grown up woman is missing from the house of petitioner-it is alleged by the complainant that she has been done away by the petitioners with the connivance of her mother-petitioners have failed to satisfactorily explain the whereabout of the abductee-it is a very serious allegation of the commission of a henious offence and so far there is no material available on the record to justify the grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners--pi-e- arrest bail declined in the circumstances
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Cr.C 913
Appelant Side: MUHAMMAD ISHTIAQ
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: SARMAD JALAL OSMANY
Judgment Result:Bail granted.
--s. 497(2)-bail-grant of--prayer for--case of further inquiry-offence of zina (enforcement of hudood) ordinance (vii of 1979), s. 10(2)-- whether or not female with whom accused had claimed to have married, was divorced earlier by her husband, was a question of further inquiry and only trial court could establish such fact-f.i.r. was delayed by three years for which no reasonable explanation was given-f.i.r. having been lodged after consultation-tentative conclusion was borne out by fact that some difference of opinion existed on religious matters between accused and complainant-both accused and female who allegedly had contracted marriage soon after divorce were living together as husband and wife-- prima facie, its hardly a case of zma--accused was entitled to bail in the circumstances. .
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Cr.C 1016
Appelant Side: RUKHSANA KAUSAR and another
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: CH. IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN
Judgment Result:Bail confirmed.
-ss. 497(2) & 498-bail before arrest-prayer for confirmation-offence of zina (enforcement of hudood) ordinance, 1979 (vii of 1979), s. 10/16-petitioner enticed away female accused who was legally wedded wife of complainant--allegation of-female accused present in court had stated that she was never married to complainant and had lawfully married male accused; she had brought suit for jactitation of marriage against complainant before family court which was pending adjudication and that she had also filed constitutional petition for quashment of criminal case against her which was pending adjudication-female accused had also stated that nobody had enticed or taken her away and that she was living happily with male accused of her own free-will and consent-case being of two nikahs as to which out of those was genuine, was a question which could be more appropriate gone into family court-police function was only to collect material/evidence and not to opine about validity or otherwise of nikahnama-case of accused persons, in circumstances, was fully covered under sub-section (2) of s. 497, cr.p.c. calling for further inquiry into their guilty-accused had joined investigation-interim pre- arrest bail confirmed.
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Cr.C 1019
Appelant Side: Mst. HAJIRAN BIBI
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: CH. IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN
Judgment Result:Bail granted.
-s. 497(2)-petitioner woman seeks post arrest bail in a case registered under offence of zina (enforcement of hudood) ordinance, 1979 (vii of 1979), s. 10/16-case of further inquiry-accused allegedly was enticed away by her co-accused and case against accused was got registered after about 13 days from alleged incident-accused alongwith her bail application had attached copy of plaint of suit for dissolution of marriage which she filed against complainant 9 days prior to registration of criminal case against her-accused, in said plaint had averred that complainant had kicked her out from his house about 2-1/2 years prior to institution of suit for dissolution of marriage against complainant-said suit was pending adjudication before competent family court-no direct evidence of zina was against accused and it was yet to be seen if she could be held liable for alleged offence of zina-case of accused, in circumstances, was covered under sub-section (2) of s. 497, cr.p.c. calling for further inquiry-accused was mother of five children-bail ..: granted.
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Lahore High Court 504
Appelant Side: GHULAM FARID
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE LODHRAN and others
Judge Name: FARRUKH LATEEF
Judgment Result:Petition dismissed.
--s. 5 & sched.-non-consolidation of suit for restitution of conjugal rights with suit for jactitation of marriage-effect-suit for jactitation of marriage was on evidence stage when suit for restitution of conjugal rights was filed-apart from that family court was not bound to have consolidated suit for restitution of conjugal rights with that of jactitation of marriage in as much as identical questions of law and facts were not involved.
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Lahore High Court 504
Appelant Side: GHULAM FARID
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE LODHRAN and others
Judge Name: FARRUKH LATEEF
Judgment Result:Petition dismissed.
-ss. 10 & 12-pre-trial and post trial re-conciliation proceedings not conducted-effect-reconciliation proceedings would be necessary where marriage admittedly subsists-in suit for jactitation of marriage existence of valid marriage was denied-reconciliation proceedings in such a case would thus be meaningless-pre-trial re-conciliation were, however, conducted, while after conclusion of evidence which were un-rebutted, it had become apparent that no valid nikah between parties subsisted-post reconciliation proceeding in such case were not considered necessary- non-compliance of provisions of sections 10 and 12 of family courts act 1964, does not constitute a ground for exercise of constitutional jurisdiction when such objection was not raised in appeal before appellate court,
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Lahore High Court 217
Appelant Side: MUHAMMAD RAMZAN
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: ALLAH DITTA and another
Judge Name: ABDUL SHAKOOR PARACHA
Judgment Result:Appeal dismissed.
--0. xxxtx, rr. 1 & 2-grant of interim injunction subject to payment of balance amount in suit for specific performance of agreement to sell was neither fanciful nor illegal-grant of injunction, on the contrary was fair, just and equitable in as much as, value of property in possession of appellant was increasing while money which was to be deposited by appellant was being devalued day by day with passage of time and vendor was put to un-necessaiy restriction by way of restraining order without deposit of money to sell property even to met his domestic needs like marriages, or to meet expenses of his children or to meet liis domestic problems which was not fair-no interference was thus, warranted in impugned order.
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Lahore High Court 227
Appelant Side: Mst. SAIQA
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, RAWALPINDI and 2 others
Judge Name: TANVIR BASHIR ANSARI
Judgment Result:Order accordingly.
- -marriage-consideration is pre-condition and pre-requisite for valid matrimonial contract in absence whereof relationship between man and his wife could not be legitimised and same would be regarded as a sinful union.
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Lahore High Court 227
Appelant Side: Mst. SAIQA
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, RAWALPINDI and 2 others
Judge Name: TANVIR BASHIR ANSARI
Judgment Result:Order accordingly.
--s. 5 & sched.-constitution of pamstan (-1973), art. 199--trial courts decreed for dissolution of marriage through khula in favour of wife was maintained, howevej condition placed by trial court that petitioner must return paid dower amount arid forego un-paid dower amount and also to forego decreed maintenance allowance was declared to be without legal effect.
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Lahore High Court 309
Appelant Side: Mst. SAIQA
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE etc.
Judge Name: TANVIR BASHIR ANSARI
Judgment Result:Petition accepted.
-s. & sched.-petitioner was found entitled to dissolution of marriage on the basis of khula, in consideration whereof she was directed by family court to return dower amount already received and forgoing of remaining dower amount and maintenance allowance-legality-dower is a settlement in favour of wife made prior to completion of marriage a contract and is a pre-condition of a valid marriage-payment of dower is indispensible so much so that in its absence relationship between man and wife could not be legitimized and would be regarded as a sinful union-gift or benefit on other hand which is to be restored to husband by wife in lieu of obtaining khula is in essence a gratuitous offering which may be bestowed by husband on wife is merely voluntary in nature- dower whether paid or un-paid can never be in the nature of a benefit or gift which is liable to be restored in consideration for granting khula divorce-impugned judgment passed by trial court was thus, not sustainable to the extent that it makes grant of khula subject to condition of repayment of paid amount of dower by wife to husband and to obligate her to forego unpaid dower amount-impugned judgment and decree was thus, liable to be modified to that extent.
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Lahore High Court 309
Appelant Side: Mst. SAIQA
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE etc.
Judge Name: TANVIR BASHIR ANSARI
Judgment Result:Petition accepted.
-s. 9 & sched-constitution of Pakistan (1973), art. 199-decree for dissolution of marriage through khula in favour of petitioner was maintained and condition as placed by family court to forgo paid and unpaid dower amount and also maintenance allowance was declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Lahore High Court 1240
Appelant Side: SABA RIAZ
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: NAZIM/CHAIRMAN ARBITRATION COUNCIL, GULBERG LAHORE and another
Judge Name: MRS. NASIRA IQBAL
Judgment Result:Petition accepted.
--s. 7--constitution of pakistan (1973), art. 199--notice of talaq issued by chairman arbitration council on behalf of respondent assailed by petitioner-petitioner claimed that both parties were citizens of u.s.a; had contracted marriage in u.s.a., therefore, respondent chairman lacks jurisdiction to issue such notice-parties being american citizens, they would by covered by law of state where their marriage was contracted and all disputes relating therefrom including proceedings of divorce would be governed by law of state of oklahama (u.s.a), therefore, respondent chairman has no jurisdiction to entertain, notice sent to him by husband of petitioner regarding divorce that he had pronounced on petitioner-proceeding conducted by respondent chairman were declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 AJ&K Court 116
Appellant Side: CINDY PARKER SECOND SECRETARY COUNSELLOR SECTION, BRITISH HIGH COMMISSION, DIPLOMATIC ENCLAVE, RAMN
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: SAEED SALEEM and 5 others
Judge Name: SYED MANZOOR H. GILANI
Judgment Result:Petition accepted.
--s. 44--factum of marriage-marriage solemnized through coercion and force-marriage alone does not make her living or residing with her alleged husband legal or proper if the same was through force and against her free will and wish-union has to remain free of coercion and duress throughout not only at the time of marriage-where wife feels insecure and threatened to live with her husband, such fact amounts to illegal custody and detention, irrespective of validity or otherwise of marriage- detained lady was set at liberty and in view of her statement that she wanted to go to join her family jn england and holds british passport s.s.p. concerned was directed^ to safely escort the lady to british high commission and ensure air ticket and other necessary arrangements for her safe custody to england.
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 AJ&K Court 116
Appelant Side: CINDY PARKER SECOND SECRETARY COUNSELOR SECTION, BRITISH HIGRCOMMISSION, DIPLOMATIC ENCLAVE, RAMN
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: SAEED SALEEM and 5 others
Judge Name: SYED MANZOOR H. GILANI
Judgment Result:Petition accepted.
-s. 44-habeas corpus petition on behalf of a British national who was allegedly detained against her free will and wish-statement of detained lady before court was self speaking that she had been forcibly married and such fact was told by her to her husband whom she claimed she does not like nor wanted to marry him-perusal of statement of detained lady was clear enough to believe that she had been illegally and improperly detained though on the pretext of marriage which was forced and coerced marriage against her free will and wish-detained lady being sui juris, competent to understand convey and express her feelings is a british ^ national having british passport with pakistan visa-she admits that she had written letter to counsellor section of British embassy for seeking their help-illegal and improper detention of aggrieved lady would entitle her to be set free and being major was entitled to reside and live at any place of her choice
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Sh.C-AJ&K 22
Appelant Side: NASIR PERVAIZ
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: SHAZIA QAYYUM
Judge Name: IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN BUTT
Judgment Result:Order accordingly
--ss. 10 & 12-non-compliance of provisions of ss. 10 & 12 in a suit for dissolution of marriage-non-compliance of provisions of ss. 10 & 12 of aj&k family courts act 1993 do not justify to set aside decree for dissolution of marriage passed by family court, in as much as, non- compliance thereof, was mere irregularity and same would not vitiate proceedings of family court
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Sh.C-AJ&K 22
Appelant Side: NASIR PERVAIZ
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: SHAZIA QAYYUM
Judge Name: IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN BUTT
Judgment Result:Order accordingly
-.-schedule-appellants claim that he was entitled to return of specific articles and dower which he had given to respondent at time of 'nikah' was not decide by respondent-respondent was directed to return admitted articles and dower money in hew of fc/m/a--decree for dissolution of marriage on ground of khula was however, maintained.
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Sh.C-AJ&K 22
Appelant Side: NASIR PERVAIZ
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: SHAZIA QAYYUM
Judge Name: IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN BUTT
Judgment Result:Order accordingly
-preamble-civil procedure code (v of 1908), s. 11-khula being recurring cause of action could not be hit by principle of res-judicata--wife cannot be compelled to live with her husband even if he obtains decree for restitution of conjugal rights-wife on basis of fresii £a,cts and circumstances can prefer suit for dissolution of marriage on basis of "khula" even though decree for restitution of conjugal rights was passed against her-dismissal of earlier suit on basis of "khula" would not debar wife to take up plea of "khula" in subsequent suit as plea of "khula" is a recurring cause of action.
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Sh.C-AJ&K 22
Appelant Side: NASIR PERVAIZ
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: SHAZIA QAYYUM
Judge Name: IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN BUTT
Judgment Result:Order accordingly
-ss. 10 £ 12-suit for dissolution of marriage on basis of "khula"--representation of respondent through agent-aj&k family courts act 1993, does not take away right of a counsel or agent to appear and act for or on behalf of his client, therefore, bar cannot be created for a lady not to be represented through her duly authorised agent or counsel.
Citation Name: PLJ 2002 Quetta High Court 45
Appelant Side: Mst. RAZIA
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: ABDUL HAMEED and another
Judge Name: RAJA FAYYAZ AHMAD C. J., AND TARIQ MEHMOOD
Judgment Result:Case remanded.
--s. 5 & sched.--constitution of pakistan (1973), art. 199-appeal against dismissal of suit for dissolution of marriage was withdrawn by counsel df plaintiff on mistaken view of law-constitutional petition- maintainability-apart from the fact that appeal had been withdrawn by plaintiffs counsel from the court of district judge only on account of his negligence or carelessness, act and conduct of district judge in passing mechanical order on application for withdrawal of appeal, without realizing that factually appeal was rightly instituted or raising question of maintainability was also a factor which led to petitioner in withdrawing her appeal and consequently filing constitutional petition in high court- order of district judge allowing withdrawal of appeal was without lawful authority, effect of that order was that he had refused to exercise jurisdiction, which was actually vested in hinv-order of district judge in allowing withdrawal of appeal was declared to have been passed without lawful authority and of no legal effect-appeal filed before district judge would be deemed to have been validly instituted and pending-district judge was directed to decide plaintiffs appeal after providing opportunity of hearing to both parties.
Citation Name: PLJ 2002 Karachi High Court 66
Appelant Side: WALI HAIDER
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: Mst. PARVEEN and 2 others
Judge Name: FAIZ MUHAMMAD QURESHI,
Judgment Result:Petition dismissed
-s. 5 sched-constitution of pakistan (1973), art. 199-decree for dissolution of marriage granted by concurrent judgment of two courts below-validity-defendant's side was closed during proceedings by trial court on account of his conduct in as much as, he remained indifferent during trial-defendant neither appeared at the time when written statement was filed with the result that written statement was filed without verification nor did he produce his evidence-even after closing of his side be did not make any application for re-opening of his case, but preferred to argue his case through newly appointed counsel-no flaw in judgment was pointed out to show that the same suffered from any defect-no interference was warranted in judgments and decrees of courts below.
Citation Name: PLJ 2002 Karachi High Court 117
Appelant Side: HASHAM SADARUDDIN GANJI
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: IIND ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE SOUTH KARACHI and others
Judge Name: WAHID Bux BROHI
Judgment Result:Petition dismissed
-r. 5--family court~jurisdiction~suit for dissolution of marriage filed in family court at karachi-defendant's plea that both parties being canadian citizens, court at karachi lack jurisdiction to entertain and try such suit-despite such plea defendant could not show that parties had lost their pakistani citizen ship-nikahnama was admittedly registered at karachi-plaintiff admittedly was not residing at the given address at karachi-marriage between parties having been solemnized in karachi under islamic law, second nikah at canada was exercise in futility- second nikah over and above existing valid nikah is not recognized in islam nor is judicial separation-if all the facts asserted by plaintiff were correct, she was justified in instituting suit in karachi.
Citation Name: PLJ 2002 Cr.C 997
Appelant Side: ZEESHAN AFZAL alias SHANI
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: ALI NAWAZ CHAUDHRY AND RUSTAM ALI MALIK
Judgment Result:Appeal dismissed
--s. 302--murder--offence of--conviction and sentence-appeal against-offence not seen by anyone-convict picked up in identification parade-recovery of stolen articles effected by police-motive not shown m, fir--effect of~appreciation of evidence-it is admitted fact that mst "s" deceased was paternal aunt of "z" accused/appellant whose mother had been divorced by his father-he himself in his statement u/s 342 cr.p.c. had stated that his father had contracted second marriage-in his aforesaid, statement he had further stated that his paternal aunt "s", deceased loved him and she wanted to marry his daughter "m" deceased with him, but other relatives took it ill and they did not like his visits to house of his aforesaid paternal aunt-it is correct that in fir there was no intention of alleged stolen articles-but we can also understand as to what was state of mind of complainant immediately after reaching his house when he saw dead bodies of his mother and sister lying in bath room with their throats cut with sharp edged weapon-only possible thing he could do at that moment was to shout, cry and to raise alarm-it could not be expected from him at that moment to check up household articles to find out as to whether any theft had been committed in house-conduct of complainant in that respect does not appear to be unnatrual-having failed to marry mst *m" daughter of his aunt, "z" accused/appellant could do anything, including murder of "mst". "m" and her mother-in original fir no notice was attributed to accused appellant-as such it was not necessary for prosecution to prove existence of motive-even most heinous offences are some times committed without existence of any motive-however, during trial, it did come to light that "z" accused/ appellant did have motive to committee offences in question-death sentence of appellant confirmed-appeal dismissed.
Citation Name: PLJ 2002 Cr.C 1463
Appelant Side: KHADIM HUSSAIN and another
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA
Judgment Result:Bail granted.
-s. 497--offence of zina (enforcement of hudood) ordinance, 1979--s. 10& 16-pakistan penal code 1860 (xlv of 1860), ss. 467, 468 and 471-zina and abduction-offence of-grant of bail-prayer for-it is notdisputed that alleged enticee had already filed suit for jactitation ofmarriage against complainant which matter is still pending before family court-apparently, mst. "m" had throughout been maintaining that shehad contracted valid marriage with "f" co-accused and that her claimedmarriage with "a", complainant is sham and bogus-according to counsellor petitioner, MST. "m" has been living with her husband namely "f" co-accused since her marriage with him and from said wedlock a child has already taken birth which child is now 8/9 months old-role alleged against petitioners in fir is secondary in nature and admittedly alleged enticee has not been recovered from petitioner's custody during investigation-held: case against petitioners calls for further inquiry into their guilt within purview of sub-section (2) of s. 497 cr.p.c.-petitioners admitted to bail.
Citation Name: PLJ 2002 Cr.C 1482
Appellant Side: MUHAMMAD JAMSHED
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: CH. IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN,
Judgment Result:Bail granted
--s. 497-offence of zina (enforcement of hudood) ordinance, 1979 (vii of1979), ss. 10 & 16-bail-grant of-prayer for-case of two nikah-earlier nikah disowned-suit for jactitation of marriage under trial with familycourt-matter of further inquiry-firstly, it is case of two nikah-she has gone to competent family court for declaration of her nikah with "a" tobe forged and fictitious and ineffective-famly court is yet to deliver any . verdict in respect of same-secondly, she has owned her nikah with petitioner-admitteldy, there is also no direct evidence of zina against petitioner case covers u/s. 497(2) cr. p.c.-bail granted.
Citation Name: PLJ 2002 Cr.C 3
Appelant Side: GULZAR AHMAD and another
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA
Judgment Result:Bail granted.
--s. 497 (1st) proviso-bail-offence u/s. 10(2)/11 offence of zina(enforcement of hudood) ordinance, 1979 read with s. 380 ppc-- contention that petitioners have duly contracted marriage with each other after petitioner no. 1 had divorced his previous wife-it is not disputed that no stolen property was recovered from petitioner's possession during investigation-challan has already been submitted and, thus, physical custody of petitioners is no longer required for purposes of investigation-petitioner no. 2 is a woman and her case attracts provisions of first proviso to sub-section (1) of section 497, cr.p.c.-bail granted.
Citation Name: PLJ 2002 Supreme Court 1090
Appelant Side: BALQISAM JANA and others
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: SALEEM ANWAR KHAN etc.
Judge Name: ABDUR RAHMAN KHAN AND MIAN MUHAMMAD AJMAL
Judgment Result:Appeal accepted.
-s. 5 & sched.--muslim family laws ordinance (viii of 1961), s. 6- constitution of pakistan (1978), art. 199-suit for maintenance-wife's contention was that her husband had married second wife, thus, she under the law was entitled to refuse to live with him and perform matrimonial obligations-husband's contention was that wife had withdrawn her application for amendment of plaint to add the ground of his second marriage without permission and its implication-supreme court, however, granted leave to appeal to examine in detail the relevant law as to whether wife could refuse to live with her husband and perform martial obligations on account of his second marriage.
Citation Name: PLJ 2002 Cr.C 651
Appelant Side: JAMIL ARSHAD
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: MIAN MUHAMMAD JAHANGIR AND M.A. SHAHID SIDDIQUI
Judgment Result:Appeal partly accepted.
-s. 302-b~murder~conviction and sentence-appeal against-although, accused has not taken up this plea in his statement under section 342 cr.p.c. but prosecution case itself suggests that mst. n (deceased) had contracted marriage with k (deceased) secretly more than a year prior to occurrence and then she left house of her parents about eight months thereafter-such unceremonious marriages in our social set up are not approved and often not accepted even by parents of spouses who fell humiliated and exposed to contempt and criticism-accused being nearst in degree to mst. n must have remained under constant mental torture, pinching him and compelling him to take revenge-he must have felt difficult to face his friends, relatives and other people of his locality-a sensible man in ordinary circumstances would not kill his own sister and brother-in-law-mother of accused has lost her daughter on one hand and in case sentence is not altered she would be losing her son also-k (deceased) also cannot be regarded as "muasoom-uddum" (as he was also responsible for violating out well established social norms and bring bad name not only to his own family but also to family of accused-death sentence altered to imprisonment for life.
Citation Name: PLJ 2002 Lahore High Court 1061
Appelant Side: REHMAT KHAN and others
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: MUHAMMAD (deceased) through his! Representatives and others
Judge Name: MAULVI ANWAR-UL-HAQ AND MIAN HAMTO FAROOQ
Judgement Result:Appeal dismissed.
---ss, 2 & 3--succession--entitlement of shares-suit for possession-decreed by trial court-challenge to~"c" was last male owner of suit land~his estate was mutated in the name of "r" his daughter and "s" widow of his predeceased son "k"~on marriage of "r" entire estate was mutated in name of "s" her l/4th share mutated in favour of her l. rs.~ "m" claimed his share in property being son of "r" and filed suit for possession-suit decreed in his favour-validity -limitation-question of-to being with it is admitted on all hands that on death of "c" mutation was attested and land was mutated in favour of "s" as widow of predeceased son and also "r" daughter of "s" as widow of predeceased son and also "r" daughter of "c"--having considered evidence on record it is agreed with trial court that "k" had pre-deceased "c" and that it was succession to estate of "c" which opened upon termination of limited estate of "s" widow of "k", "c" was last male owner of land and by virtue of section 2-a added to act v of 1962 by Punjab ordinance xhi of 1983, it shall be deemed that he inherited land under Muslim personal law-thus mst. "r" who was alive when "c" died would be titled to inherit \ share in estate of her father while remaining share goes to collaterals i.e. appellant and his brother-it stands established on record rather admitted that plaintiff was son of mst. 'r' daughter of 'c' in.terms of section 3 read with section 2-a of act, 1962-held : succession opened on 31.12.1962 and suit having been filed on 16.10.1974 was well within time.
Citation Name: PLJ 2002 Lahore High Court 1376
Appelant Side: SHAHID HAMEED JANJUA
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE RAWALPINDI and another
Judge Name: AMJAD ALI
Judgment Result:Petition dismissed.
-petitioner had not challenged decree for dissolution of marriage in favour of his former wife-said decree has, therefore, become final-hence, at this stage, petitioner cannot find fault therein to say that amount of dower should have directed to be not due to his former wife-since decree for dissolution of marriage has already acquired finality, any modification by reversing to another decree cannot be made in former decree-even otherwise, it is well settled that dower is a debt and unless wife waives same, it is payable to wife-petitioner has not contested amount of dower and that same has not yet been paid to his former wife-he would, therefore, be liable to make payment of amount of dower, notwithstanding dissolution of marriage on basis ofkhula.
Citation Name: PLJ 2002 Lahore High Court 1459
Appelant Side: SIRAJ DIN and 2 others
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: KHUSHI MUHAMMAD (deceased) Through Legal Representatives
Judge Name: MIAN HAMID FAROOQ
Judgment Result:Revision accepted.
--s. 42 sale-deed in favour of defendants assailed by plaintiffs on the ground that plaintiffs had not executed sale-deed but marriage deed in favour of defendants and that sale-deed in question, was illegal, based on fraud and ineffective on the rights of plaintiff-plaintiffs however, could not produce lease deed or copy of the same, thus, only document which remained in the field was sale-deed-deferidants, besides producing registered sale-deed, produced scribe of sale-deed and one attesting witness thereof-defendants, thus proved execution of sale-deed while plaintiff failed to prove that they in fact, had executed mortgage deed and not sale-deed.
Citation Name: PLJ 2002 Lahore High Court 1470
Appelant Side: IJAZ AHMAD and others
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: AKBAR ALI and 6 others
Judge Name: ABDUL SHAKOOR PARACHA
Judgment Result:Revision accepted.
-s. 3-limitation act (ix of 1908), art. 120-civil procedure code (v of 1908), s. 115-females holding limited estate was married in 1955-56- interest of such females as limited owners was extinguished on account of their marriage-plaintiffs claiming their title to such estate were required to file suit within 6 years of termination of limited estate-suit filed by plaintiff on 26.11.1987 was barred by limitation-findings of courts below in decreeing plaintiffs suit was reversed and the same was dismissed in circumstances.
Citation Name: PLJ 2002 Lahore High Court 1748
Appelant Side: SHAMSHAD BIBI
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: S.P. OKARA and 2 others
Judge Name: IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHARY
Judgment Result:Petition accepted.
-s. 561-a offence of zina (enforcement of hudood) ordinance (vii of 1979), s. 16-constitution of pakistan (1973), art. 199-petitioners seeking quashment of f.i.r. registered against them under s. 16 of offence of zina (enforcement of hudood) ordinance, 1979-complainant had divorced his wife (accused) and kept his daughters-accused lady claimed that her daughters finding life difficult with their step mother had on their own accord left their father's house and joined her and that no-body had abducted them and registration of case was to pressurise her to send daughters to him-pn'ma facie it seems that complainant has wrongly shown petitioner as his wife and has concealed factum of contracting of second marriage by him~registration of case and pendency of investigation seem to be abuse of process of law-f.i.r. registered againt petitioners was quashed in circumstances.
Citation Name: PLJ 2002 Lahore High Court 1950
Appelant Side: Mst. ROQIA BIBI
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: S.H.O PS, JANDAWALA, TEHSIL KALURKOT DISTT. BHAKKAR and another
Judge Name: IJAZ AHMED CHAUDHARY
Judgment Result:Petition accepted.
-s. 7--offence of zina (enforcement of hudood) ordinance, 1979 (vii, of 1979), s. 11-constitution of pakistan, 1973-art. 199~ta/a&--joining of petitioner her husband after passing of decree by family court in suit for dissolution of marriage on the ground of 'khula' within period of "zcwa£"--filing of fir by complainant on charge of zzna-quashing of fir- constitution petition-petitioner claims that decree for dissolution of marriage was obtained on 15.3.2000 by petitioner but during iddat period she joined her husband just after two months after decree and they contracted 'sharee nikah'-though they were husband and wife and talaq could be revoked before expiry of 90 days hence petitioner and her husband are living as husband and wife and impugned fir has been lodged with mala fide intention and ulterior motive for redressal of personal grievance by complainant-case titled nawab bibi vs. mst. anwar bibi and 6 others (pld 1970 lahore 1) also supports contention raised by counsel for petitioner and facts of said case.also apply to instant case in which principle has been laid down by judge trat pre-condition of marriage with stranger cannot be claimed in case of "khula"--held: petitioner by joining her husband before effectiveness of talaq has not committed any offence for which they can be held guilty for the, same- fir quashed and petition accepted.
Citation Name: PLJ 2002 Sh.C-AJ&K 8
Appelant Side: NAZAKAT PARVEEN
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: IKHLAQ AHMAD
Judge Name: IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN BUTT
Judgment Result:Appeal accepted.
-ss. 7 & ll--appreciation of-evidence in proceedings before family court-method of institution of suit and recording of evidence altogether different from cases instituted in civil courts-evidence adduced before family court, thus, cannot be evaluated and appraised in a manner as it is appreciated in cases before civil courts-documentary evidence produced before family court could not, therefore, be discarded for the mere reason that list of dowry and receipts were not exhibited-appellant had appended list of her dowry, as also receipts with her plaint and she was cross-examined in detail relating to such documents, therefore, documentary, evidence could not be ignored and discarded merely for the reason that the same could not be exhibited-documentary evidence produced by appellant coupled with oral evidence sufficiently proved assertions of appellant relating to her claim of dowry-evidence of appellant having not been challenged in cross-examination would be presumed to have been accepted by respondent-evidence produced by appellant sufficiently proved that dowry worth specified amount was given to appellant at the time of marriage and that the same was in possession of respondent-trial court's judgment and decree denying relief to appellant was set aside and appellant's suit was decreed in terms of receipts appended with the plaint
Citation Name: PLJ 2002 Sh.C-AJ&K 17
Appelant Side: Mst. ZATOON
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: SABIR HUSSAIN and 3 others
Judge Name: IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN, BUTT
Judgment Result:Order accordingly.
sched-registration of criminal case and litigation between parties asserted ~by plaintiff has been admitted by defendant's witness-wife in such state of affairs has developed hatred towards husband and evidently spouses cannot live life of harmony and in conformity with their obligations-fact that after decree of dissolution of marriage wife had contracted second marriage and had given birth to five children could not be lost sight of-trial court had thus, rightly dissolved marriage which warrants no interference.
Citation Name: PLJ 2002 Sh.C-AJ&K 17
Appelant Side: Mst. ZATOON
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: SABIR HUSSAIN and 3 others
Judge Name: IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN, BUTT
Judgment Result:Order accordingly.
-sched.-ktiuta-dissolution of marriage on the ground of khula without amendment in plaint and without framing issue-legality-additional district judge recorded finding that issue of 'khula' being legal one, trial court was empowered to dissolve marriage on the basis of 'khula' even without framing issue and that sufficient evidence to resolve issue of 'khula' being available on record, chance of adducing more evidence cannot be given-such finding was maintained by high court, therefore,' district judge was not empowered to disturb such finding which had already attained finality-even otherwise, in case of 'khula' marriage can be dissolved without amendment, in plaint and'without framing issue thereon
Citation Name: PLJ 2001 Peshawar High Court 25
Appellant Side: ANWAR RASHID
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: Mst. MINHAJA and another
Judge Name: MALIK HAMID SAEED AND TARIQ PERVEZ KHAN
Judgment Result:Petition dismissed
-s. 10(3) & 12(2)-decree for dissolution of marriage-defendant's claim in appeal that trial court had failed to observe legal procedure in terms of s. 10(3) & s. 12(2) of family courts act 1964, was belied by record in that reconciliation proceedings had taken place between parties at pre-trial stage but resulted in failure-same course was re-adopted after close of evidence of both parties but still settlement could be arrived at between parties from such re-conciliation-defendant's contention, that trial court was required to constitute board for re-conciliation under injunctions of Islam was without any force-family courts act, 1964 stands extended to malakand division (wherein parties reside) and courts functioning there were bound to decide cases strictly in accordance with laws made applicable to those areas-trial court while deciding us between parties had fully followed relevant law-marriage between parties having not been consummated and plaintiff being minor at the time of nikah, on attaining age of puberty had exercised her right under the law and proper procedure for trial of suit having been followed, no illegality or irregularity had been committed by trial court while deciding case- impugned judgement, therefore, cannot be interfered with in constitutional jurisdiction.
