Habeas writ for recovery of minor. mother vs Trust.
 |
| Habeas | mother vs Trust. |
❖ بچوں کی حفاظت کے لیے اختیارات اور ذمہ داریاں
❖ بنیادی اختیارات
بچوں کے تحفظ کے لیے مناسب اقدامات کرنا؛
چائلڈ پروٹیکشن مینجمنٹ انفارمیشن سسٹم قائم کرنا اور سالانہ رپورٹ تیار کرنا؛
مالی وسائل جمع کرنا تاکہ بچوں کے خاص تحفظ کے پروگرامز چلائے جا سکیں؛
بچوں کی حفاظت سے متعلق تحقیق اور نظامی تفتیش کرنا؛
جب بچے جرم کے شکار ہوں تو متعلقہ حکام کے ذریعے مجرموں کے خلاف مقدمہ چلانا؛
فنڈ قائم کرنا اور اس کا انتظام کرنا؛
اوپر دی گئی سرگرمیوں سے متعلق ضمنی اور ضمنی اعمال انجام دینا؛
کسی بھی شکایت پر خود یا کسی دوسرے کے ذریعے تفتیش کرنا جو بچوں کے مفاد سے متعلق ہو؛
حکومت کی جانب سے سونپے گئے دیگر کام انجام دینا۔
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ
❖ عمل درآمد اور نگرانی
حکومت، نجی ادارے اور NGOs سب کو اس اتھارٹی کے تحت لایا گیا ہے تاکہ کم از کم سماجی، تربیتی اور دوبارہ شامل کرنے کے معیار کو یقینی بنایا جا سکے؛
کسی بھی خلاف ورزی پر ذمہ دار کو قانونی کارروائی کا سامنا کرنا پڑے گا؛
اتھارٹی کو نہ صرف تفتیش کرنی ہے بلکہ مجرموں کے خلاف مقدمات بھی شروع کرنے ہیں جب بچے متاثر ہوں۔
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ
❖ NGOs اور ٹرسٹ کے کردار
کئی NGOs اور ٹرسٹ بچوں کے تحفظ اور فلاح و بہبود کا دعوی کرتے ہیں لیکن عملی کام محدود یا غیر مؤثر ہیں؛
مثال کے طور پر، ایک ٹرسٹ 25 سال سے موجود ہے لیکن کسی بچے نے وہاں سے معیاری تعلیم حاصل نہیں کی۔
اگر یتیم بچوں کی کفالت خاندانوں کو دی جاتی ہے تو بچوں کی بھلائی کے لیے مناسب نگرانی کی ضرورت ہے۔
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ
❖ سوشل ویلفیئر ڈیپارٹمنٹ کی ذمہ داریاں
سوشل ویلفیئر ڈیپارٹمنٹ اور DG Child Protection Authority کو پچھلے دو سال کے اقدامات کی تفصیل جمع کر کے عدالت میں پیش کرنی ہوگی؛
ریکارڈ میں بچوں کی کفالت، یتیموں کی دیکھ بھال، اور دوبارہ شامل کرنے کے اقدامات شامل ہونے چاہئیں؛
اداروں کا وزٹ کر کے یہ یقینی بنایا جائے کہ وہ کم از کم معیار پر پورا اترتے ہیں؛
ہر ڈویژن میں ریفارمیٹری / ہوسٹل سینٹرز قائم کیے جائیں تاکہ بے سہارا بچوں کو پولیس اور مجاز مجسٹریٹ کی منظوری سے وہاں رکھا جا سکے؛
ہر سہ ماہی میں عدالت کو تعمیل کی رپورٹ جمع کرائی جائے۔
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ
❖ عدالت کی ہدایت
کسی بھی بچے کی والدہ یا والد کے حق میں کم از کم ابتدائی جانچ کی جائے تاکہ بچے کی دیکھ بھال یقینی ہو؛
سیکشن 491 Cr.PC کے تحت، بچوں کی کفالت کے مسائل میں قانونی تکنیکی پیچیدگیوں کو ترجیح نہ دی جائے؛
مثال کے طور پر، Baby Ayesha کی والدہ کو فوری کفالت دی گئی، کیونکہ والدین کی حیثیت پر کوئی اختلاف نہیں تھا۔
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ
❖ اداروں اور عدالتوں کے رویے
تمام مجسٹریٹس اور ڈسٹرکٹ ججز کو بچوں کی کفالت کے مقدمات میں کم از کم ابتدائی جانچ کرنی چاہیے؛
بچے کی بھلائی کو ترجیح دینا اور قانونی تکنیکی پیچیدگیوں میں الجھنے سے گریز کرنا چاہیے؛
NGO اور ٹرسٹ کی مدد صرف معاون کردار ادا کرے، ریاست کی ذمہ داری کا نعم البدل نہیں۔
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ
❖ نتیجہ
عدالت نے ہدایت دی کہ تمام متعلقہ ادارے فوری طور پر تعمیل کریں؛
بچوں کی حفاظت اور فلاح کے لیے ریاست کی ذمہ داری کو یقینی بنایا جائے؛
عدالت کے احکامات کے مطابق ریکارڈ اور رپورٹس پیش کرنا لازمی ہے۔
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ
Mst. Beenish نے اپنے والدین کی رضا کے بغیر شادی کی اور اپنے شوہر کے ساتھ UAE چلی گئی۔ حمل کے دوران، انہوں نے پاکستان میں بچے کی پیدائش کا فیصلہ کیا کیونکہ وہاں کی مالی حالت ان کے لیے بہتر تھی۔ 7 ستمبر 2018 کو بچی عائشہ کی پیدائش کے بعد، ان کی بہن نے ہسپتال سے بچی کو اٹھا کر Sarim Burney Welfare Trust کو دے دیا، جس کی وجہ سے Mst. Beenish کو اپنی بچی کی تحویل حاصل کرنے کے لیے عدالت سے رجوع کرنا پڑا۔
عدالت نے ابتدائی طور پر Mst. Beenish کی درخواست مسترد کر دی، جس کے بعد انہوں نے سندھ ہائی کورٹ سے مدد طلب کی۔ ہائی کورٹ نے حکم دیا کہ Mst. Beenish بچی کو پہچاننے کے لیے Trust کے ساتھ جائیں، اور Trust کو بچی کی موجودگی کی تصدیق کرنے کی ہدایت کی۔ بعد میں، Trust نے بچی کی پہچان کے لیے ثبوت فراہم کیے اور عدالت نے بچے کی تحویل Mst. Beenish کو دے دی۔
آرڈر شیٹ میں درج اہم نکات یہ ہیں:
پس منظر: درخواست گزار، مسز بینش نے عدالت سے اپنی کمسن بچی عائشہ کی تحویل کے لیے درخواست دی۔ 07.09.2018 کو بچے کی پیدائش کے بعد، بینش کے خاندان نے بچے کو سریم برنی ویلفیئر ٹرسٹ میں منتقل کر دیا، جس کے باعث تحویل میں تنازعہ پیدا ہوا۔ ضلعی اور سیشن جج نے ابتدائی طور پر درخواست کو مسترد کر دیا، کیونکہ والدین کی تصدیق اور مناسب تحویل کے طریقہ کار میں مسائل تھے۔
عدالت کے نتائج: سندھ ہائی کورٹ نے 17.10.2018 کو صورتحال کا جائزہ لے کر حکم دیا کہ درخواست گزار، بینش، اپنی بیٹی کی شناخت سریم برنی ویلفیئر ٹرسٹ میں کر سکے۔ عدالت نے ٹرسٹ کا دورہ کرنے کے لیے متعلقہ حکام کو بھی ہدایت دی تاکہ یقین دہانی ہو سکے کہ بچوں کی دیکھ بھال اور قوانین کے مطابق عمل کیا جا رہا ہے۔
نتیجہ:
عدالت نے آخرکار یہ فیصلہ کیا کہ عائشہ کی والدیت پر کوئی تنازع نہیں ہے اور بچی کی تحویل اس کی ماں، مسز بینش کے حوالے کر دی جائے۔ عدالت نے نچلی عدالت کے کیس کو ہینڈل کرنے کے طریقہ کار پر تنقید کی اور کہا کہ بچوں کے تحویل کے تنازعات کو زیادہ حساسیت اور تفصیل سے نمٹنا چاہیے۔
یہ خلاصہ کیس کے اہم عناصر اور عدالت کے فیصلوں کو بیان کرتا ہے۔
Must read Judgement
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
CP NO.S-2116/2018
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Order with signature of Judge
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17.10.2018
Mr. Altaf Hussain advocate alongwith petitioner Mst. Beenish & Urooj
sister of petitioner.
Mr. Qadir Hussain Khan, Advocate for respondent No.2 alongwith
Ayesha Younus, Adnan Khan, Basalat A. Khan.
Aashique Hussain Kalhoro and Muhammad Rehman, Deputy
Directors, Social Welfare Department alongwith Abdul Khalique
Qureshi.
……………
Salahuddin Panhwar, J: Precisely relevant facts of this petition are
that petitioner approached the District and Sessions Judge under
section 491 Cr.P.C. with regard to custody of minor Ayesha.
According to petitioner, she contracted marriage without consent of
parents, her husband was living in UAE, she joined him and after
conceiving they decided delivery in Pakistan as they were not in a
position to bear the cost there hence she returned back, after seizure
baby Ayesha was born on 07.09.2018. Since her family was not
happy therefore her sister on the second day of delivery removed the
custody from hospital to Sarim Burney Welfare Trust, thereafter
petitioner approached District and Sessions Judge for custody which
case was entrusted to 2nd Additional District Judge Karachi South
(Ghulam Mustafa Laghari) who, after hearing, dismissed application
by order dated 19.02.2018 with findings that :-
5.
I have considered the arguments of learned
advocates for the respective parties and also have gone
through the material available on record. It is admitted
fact that the minor is kept at the shelter home of Sarim
Burney Welfare Trust. Applicant did not hand over the
custody of minor baby Aisha to Sarim Burney Welfare
Trust. Baby Aisha handed over to the Sarim Salam
Burney Welfare Trust by one lady as per arguments of
learned counsel for applicant that the said lady is
sister of applicant. The father of baby Aisha is not
{ 2 } -
come in the court nor filed any affidavit in favour of
applicant. It seems that the dispute of the
parentage is involved over the minor baby Aisha.
Proceeding U/s 491 Cr.P.C. are not available for
declaring any person as guardian or for determining
all the questions relating to the custody of minor
because the final decision of regular custody was to be
decided in the proceedings initiated by, the parties
claiming the custody of the minor before the Guardian
court.
6.
In view of the above circumstances, I am of the
humble view that the custody of the minor with the
respondent No.2 cannot be considered as illegal.
However, the applicant is at liberty to knock the door of
Guardian/Family Court for deciding the parentage of the
minor if so desires.”
Hence petitioner approached this court while exercising concurrent
jurisdiction. It would be conducive to refer relevant portion of
direction of this Court on 15.10.2018:-
“3.
Since petitioner being mother is claiming custody
of minor of a tender suckling age, she has been deprived
from custody since 7th September 2018; she approached
the trial Court where her request was declined and now
she is before this Court. No doubt custody cannot be
denied to the mother; the Trust is claiming that they are
not in a position to identify the minor. Accordingly
petitioner shall approach the Trust with counsel and
identity her daughter; on her identification minor shall
be produced before this Court.
4.
Besides, officers of Women Development
Department and any officer from the Social Welfare
Department shall visit M/s. Sarim Burney Welfare Trust
International and submit report with regard to inmates,
as well respondent No.2 shall submit complete record of
inmates along-with parentage and the Trust including
the mechanisms. At this juncture judicial propriety
demands that learned District and Sessions Judge
Karachi South shall depute any Magistrate to visit
respondent No.2’s trust and submit report in the light of
this order.”
2.
Pursuant to that learned Magistrate visited Sarim
Burney Welfare Trust, relevant portion of that report is that :-
“Respected Sir, the undersigned received the order
dated 15-10-2018 passed by the Honourable High Court
of Sindh in CP No. S-2116 of 2018 on 16-10-2018 for
compliance through the Honourable District & Sessions
{ 3 } -
Judge Karachi-South where-after the undersigned visited
the head office of Sarim Burney welfare Trust
International (hereinafter referred to as SBWTI) situated
in Wassiamall Building, near Dow Medical College, M.A
Jinnah Road, Karachi and reached at the said office at
01:30 PM.
Respected Sir, after apprising the Chairman
SBWTT Mr. Sarim Burney about the visit of undersigned
in compliance of above said order dated 15-102018, the
undersigned was informed by the Chairman SBWTI that
on 07-09-2018 one Mst. Urooj Liaquat Ali and Anjum
Parvez S/o. Parvez Akhtar lodged/ shifted one new
born baby girl to SBWTI after submitting one
Statement/ Bayan-e-Halfi to the effect that the said
baby girl had born to her sister namely Mst. Beenish
D/o. Liaquat Ali on the same day i.e. 07-09-2018 at
about 05:00 PM and since the said baby girl having
no legal father, her custody is being handed over to
SBWTI for her better upbringing with no concern with
the said baby girl by Mst. Beenish or anyone else and the
SBWTI will have all rights to either provide the said baby
girl best upbringing or to handover the custody of said
minor to anyone. (Copy of the Statement/ Bayan-e-Halfi
is annexed herewith at R-1 for kind perusal of the
Honourable Court).
Respected Sir, the Chariman SBWTI further
informed the undersigned that at the time of receiving
baby girl from Mst. Urooj and Anjum Parvez the SBWTI
had taken photograph of Mst. Urooj as well as of baby
girl who was given name by SBWTI as Palwasha. The
SBWTI also have the CCTV Camera recording which was
handed over to the undersigned in USB. (Photograph of
Mst. Urooj and baby girl, copy of CNIC of Anjum Parvez,
and relevant CCTV Camera recording in USB is annexed
herewith at R-2 to R-5 for kind perusal of the Honourable
Court).
Respected Sir, The undersigned was further
informed that on 15-10-2018 at about 02:00 PM the
petitioner party along with their learned Counsel
approached for identification purpose in compliance of
order passed by the Honourable High Court but they left
the office of SBWTI at about 04:00 PM without identifying
the baby girl by stating that they cannot wait anymore.
The reason for keeping them on wait is stated to be the
brining baby girl from shelter home of SBWTI situated at
Hyderi, North Nazimabad, Karachi which consumed more
than expected time of transportation due to traffic jam on
M. A Jinnah Road. In this regard the conversation
between the staff of SBWTI and petitioner party through
text message/SMS is also provided to the undersigned in
printed form. (Copy of the conversation through text
message/SMS is annexed herewith at R-6 for kind
perusal of the Honourable Court).
Respected Sir, The undersigned was further
informed that at the time of shifting the baby girl at
SBWTI, the petitioner Mst. Beenish, was not on record
and since there was a baby girl in existence and Mst.
Urooj and Anjum Parvez were ready to leave her at
SBWTI, the SBWTI had no issues with parentage of the
baby girl, however as a precautionary measure, the
SBWTI had duly informed the
general
public
through
its
Facebook page
(www.facebook.com/sarimburneyofficial) and Youtube
channel which has a considerable viewership of general
public.
Respected Sir, with regard to internees, the
undersigned was informed that presently around 100
persons including, children (male/female) and 08 males
are available at SBWTI. All the females and children are
kept at shelter home situated at Hyderi, North
Nazimabad. Two old age male inmates are also residing
at shelter home, however other male inmates are kept at
head office of SBWTI. The handy available informal list of
inmates has also been provided to the undersigned. (List
of the inmates provided to the undersigned is annexed
herewith at R-7 for kind perusal of the Honourable
Court).”
3.
Besides representative of Sarim Burney Welfare Trust
has submitted trust deed alongwith details of shelter homes, tax
receipts and details of inmates. At this juncture Deputy Director,
Social Welfare Department submits his report which is that :-
Under the directives of Honorable High Court of Sindh in
CP. NO. S-2116/2018, the undersigned paid visit of
Shelter Home running in Sarim Burney Welfare Trust
International, in Hyderi, North Nazimabad behind Saima
Parimall and met with Mrs. Alia Sarim vice Chairperson
/ Incharge of the Shelter home and Mr. Basalat Ali Khan
(Welfare Officer) / Lawyer of welfare trust. According to
them Sarim Burney Welfare Trust registered under Trust
Act, bearing the registration No. 237, dated 10-7-2012.
At the time of visit 88 homeless women and children/
inmates were available there of different ages, (3) three
children under two years including baby Aisha also
them. During visit the undersigned observed that the
shelter home providing good services/ facilities for the
inmates like clothing, feeding, recreational activities,
informal education and religious education with the
support of different philanthropists. The undersigned
also felt that all inmates were quite satisfied regarding
{ 5 } -
the basic necessities providing to them by the shelter
home, regarding baby Ashia a caretaker female was also
available for her care.”
4.
Further, focal person of Child Projection Authority is
present and contends that building for destitute children is under
construction for last 5/6 years and same is near completion, it is
contended that social welfare department has signed MoU with Sarim
Burney Trust to provide shelter to women.
5.
Typical facts, so surfaced during hearing of instant
petition, resulted into bringing number of unfortunate facts onto light
which, I am unable to ignore. I will attend each separately.
No one can deny to the fact that protection and
rehabilitation of every single un-owned or destitute child is the
ultimate responsibility of the State which it (State) cannot avoid
even on mere plea of working of some NGOs with help of
philanthropists. The roles of NGOs can never be a substitute to that
of responsibility of the State but may, at the most, could be of help /
assistance which, too, shall always require a supervisory eye
because the State is never supposed to compromise on protection,
life and rehabilitation of such children. Entry of a single child into
such like institutions of an NGO must be supervised till the child
either reaches to safe-hands or is made capable of leading an
honourable life. Such aspect I, painfully, admit to be ‘missing’ which
allows raising of number of questions on working and even existence
of such government institutions / authorities.
6.
Worth to add here that Sindh Child Act was promulgated
in 1955 which not only demands taking of a destitute child into
custody by the State but with concept of reformatory institution.
{ 6 } -
Such vital Act however seems to have served no purpose at all but
seems to have gotten rust and dust thereon. The Act, I would again
insist, is never meant for its presentation or to talk about in
seminars on issues but demands purposeful enforcement thereof.
The grief continues when I have to admit that since 1955 no
mechanism is provided. Even Child Protection Authority is
established about 2/3 years back but again only on papers because
State is not visible in the field.
7.
At this juncture, a reference to Section 10 of Sindh Child
Protection Authority Act, 2011, being relevant, is made hereunder
which reads as:-
10.
(1) For the purposes of this Act, the Authority shall
have powers-
(a) to coordinate and monitor the child protection related
issues at the provincial and district level;
(b) to ensure the rights of the children in need of special
protection measures;
(c) to support and establish institutional mechanisms for the
child protection issues;
(d) to make necessary efforts to enhance and strengthen the
existing services of different children welfare
institutions;
(e) to set minimum standards for social, rehabilitative, reintegrative and reformatory institution and services
and ensure their implementation;
(f) to supervise in the light of minimum standards, the functions of
all such institutions established by government or private
sector for the special protection measures of the children;
(g) to set minimum standards for all other institutions relating
to the children (like educational institutions, orphanages,
shelter homes, remand homes, certified school, youthful
offender work places, child parks and hospitals etc) and
ensure their implementation;
(h) to review laws, propose amendments in the relevant law,
wherever necessary, so as to bring those in conformity with
the relevant international instruments ratified by
Pakistan and to propose new laws;
(i) to recommend development of a Policy and Plan of Action for
the children;
(j) to monitor and report on the violation of the national and
provincial laws and international instruments and take
{ 7 } -
suitable remedial measures for the protection of the
child;
(k) to set up child protection management information system
and prepare annual reports;
(l) to mobilize financial resources for programmes relating to
special protection of children through provincial, national
and international agencies;
(m)to promote and undertake systematic investigation and
research on child protection issues;
(n) to initiate through relevant authorities, prosecution of
the offenders when children are victim of the offence;
(o) to establish and manage the Fund;
(p) to do such acts as are ancillary and incidental to the above
functions;
(q) to investigate or cause investigation, on its own or upon
a complaint, into any matter having bearing on the
interest of the children; and
(r) any other functions, which may be assigned to it by
Government.
8.
The functions, so appearing from above section of the
Act, prima facie reaffirms the fact that all the government, private or
other institutions, including NGOs, have been brought under direct
supervision / control of the Authority and that a minimum standard
for social, rehabilitative, re- integrative is required to be assured
by all such institutions which, too, under direct supervision of
Authority with a sense of assurance that any departure / violation
shall expose guilty to lawful action. The above also burdens the
Authority not only to promote and undertake systematic
investigation but to ensure initiation of prosecution of the offenders
through relevant authorities, when the victims of the offences are
children. We, unfortunately, have been experiencing an abnormal
increase in offences relating to children but the victims and parents
of such victims have never been heard of any help / assistance by
Authority. This, I admit painfully. Representatives of Social Welfare
Department are unable to satisfy this court as well assist this court
{ 8 } -
whether they have provided any shelter home/reformatory
institutions.
9.
Taking a pause here, I would add that it is also claimed
that since 25 years this Trust (respondent No.2) is in existence but
representative of that trust is unable to point out that any minor
nestled in their Trust has received good education and has qualified
even upto bachelor decree. This again is the failure of Authority of all
the laws, enacted on such subject.
It, however, claimed that in case of orphanage kids
usually many families approach them and they hand over the
custody after adaptation through Courts. Without making any
comments onto the sincerity of the Trust, I would say that when a
trust / institution claims to be working for protection, welfare &
rehabilitation of children then it must ensure such objectives. Even
in cases of giving custody of orphanage to families there must be
some mechanism to know about welfare of such child but without
troubling the families.
10.
Resuming again, the Representatives of Social Welfare
Department, present, are unable to satisfy this court as well assist
this court whether they have provided any shelter home or they have
done any concrete things so as to achieve the object of the Act by
assuring requirement of Section 10 supra. Under these
circumstances, Social Welfare department and DG Child Protection
Authority shall submit record of last two years with regard to efforts
taken for the destitute children or the recovered children; adopted
and thereafter are under the control of any darul aman. Such report
shall also include as to what steps were / are being taken so as to
{ 9 } -
achieve objectives of Section 10(m), (n) and (q) of the Act in
particular. They shall also ensure proper publication by all means of
its objectives and availability of all kinds of help, as permissible by
Act. Further they shall also physical visit to all such institutions and
shall ensure that such institutions are having minimum standards.
Reformatory /hostel centers shall be established on every division to
ensure that in case minors are destitute concerned police with the
approval of magistrate as provided under the Child Protection Act
shall nestle them in those centers. Needless to add that per Section
11 of the Act all the Executive authorities have been placed under
mandatory obligation to assist the Authority in performance of its
functions. Any departure shall not only be violation of such section
but may also expose them to legal consequences. Compliance report
shall be submitted through A.R. of this Court, on quarterly basis.
Learned MIT shall ensure compliance of this order in its letter and
spirit.
11.
Now, reverting to merits of the case. Today, the minor is
produced, parentage is not disputed. I have examined the order
passed by learned ADJ and I am shocked that how and in what
manner an Additional Sessions Judge declined custody to mother on
the plea that parentage is involved and petitioner’s sister has not filed
affidavit in her favour. It needs not be insisted that provision of
Section 491 Cr.PC can well be invoked in matters of custody of minor
children even where question of illegal confinement is not involved.
The provision itself shows that it can well be exercised even if the
custody is not illegal but is improper. The facts, prima facie,
involved custody of a child of days therefore, learned lower court
judge was supposed to take a little more efforts and was never
{ 10 } -
supposed to fall prey of technicalities. Though, remedy under section
491 Cr.PC is summary in nature yet it (summary nature), no where,
restrains one to make an inquiry particularly when it may advances
the cause of justice and is otherwise not restrained. Reference may
well be made to the case of Zohra Bibi v. Sultan Mahmood (2018
SCMR 762) where at Rel. P-766, it is observed as:-
“… Whenever it is possible to grant relief under the law,
then technicalities in the ways of administration of
justice should be avoided to the possible extent by
remaining within the domain of law. ….
12.
It is a matter of record that a little effort by this Court
resulted into making it clear that :
i)) According to the Trust at the time of receiving
possession photograph of baby and that of
petitioner’s sister was captured as well CCTV
footage are proof.
ii) Statement of depositor did disclose the name of the
present petitioner, as mother,
ii) Learned Magistrate in his report about the trust
has opined that there is no issue of parentage and
without dispute they have handed over the custody
to the petitioner (mother).
iv)
Custody of suckling baby Ayesha is handed over to
mother (petitioner).
13.
The courts are required to adjudicate the issue. Learned
judge was competent to call any person so as to make a prima facie
enquiry about status of mother least entitlement of petitioner for
custody or otherwise but he (Mr. Ghulam Mustafa Laghari, Additional
District & Sessions Judge) rather went on in saying that “It seems
that the dispute of the parentage is involved over the minor
baby Aisha” though this issue was not there. All, including
Courts, must avoid bringing legitimacy of a child into dispute
{ 11 } -
except such issue is raised for its determination. The manner in
which the learned lower court judge has dealt with the matter,
prima facie, resulted in keeping the petitioner (real mother)
deprived least away from her child for days, despite of fact that
parentage was not disputed. I would add that lap of the mother has
been considered as lap of GOD. In this case mother from the day one
was deprived by the family members, thereafter when she
approached the Additional District Court on 15.09.2018 since then
she has been deprived on technicalities by the respondents. Since the
Authority (Sindh Child Protection Act, 2011) seems to have kept its
significance into dark else petitioner could have been rescued in
hours without forcing her to keep wondering at doors of the Courts.
14.
Without going any further, I would painfully, conclude
that all learned Magistrates and District Judges in cases of section
491 Cr.P.C. or where minor children are recovered, shall ensure least
an inquiry so as to examine fitness / claim of petitioners and if none
is there then child shall be ensured to be nestled at proper place.
They shall not dispose of matters in mechanical manners if the
situation is alike the one, surfaced during hearing of the instant
petition, but are believed to go a little further to help and achieve
object of justice.
15.
In terms of above, instant petition is disposed of. Office
shall communicate this order to all concerned for compliance and
information.
J U D G
Tags
Habeas of kids