پہلے فوت شدہ بھائی کے بچوں کا وراثتی حق — بلوچستان ہائی کورٹ کا اہم فیصلہ
واقعہ کیا تھا؟
مرحوم کی کوئی اولاد یا والدین نہیں تھے۔ اس کی وفات کے بعد اس کے بھائی بہن اور ایک پہلے فوت ہو جانے والے بھائی کے دو بیٹے موجود تھے۔ پہلے فوت شدہ بھائی کے بیٹوں نے بھی مرحوم کے ترکے میں حصہ مانگا۔
عدالت نے کیا قرار دیا؟
ہائی کورٹ نے قرار دیا کہ مسلم فیملی لاز آرڈیننس 1961 کی دفعہ 4 پہلے فوت شدہ بھائی کے بچوں پر لاگو نہیں ہوتی۔ یہ دفعہ مخصوص حالات میں پہلے فوت ہونے والے بیٹے یا بیٹی کی اولاد سے متعلق ہے۔
بھائی کے بچوں کو حصہ کیوں نہیں ملا؟
عدالت نے قرار دیا کہ مسلمانوں کی وراثت کے اصول واضح ہیں۔ چونکہ مرحوم کے اپنے بھائی بہن زندہ تھے، اس لیے پہلے فوت شدہ بھائی کے بچوں کو بطور دور کے رشتہ دار (Distant Kindred) ترکے میں حصہ نہیں مل سکتا تھا۔
حتمی فیصلہ
ہائی کورٹ نے قرار دیا کہ ماتحت عدالتوں نے پہلے فوت شدہ بھائی کے بچوں کا دعویٰ درست طور پر مسترد کیا تھا۔ چنانچہ سول ریویژن خارج کر دی گئی۔
حوالہ: 2026 MLD 807, Balochistan — Nawab Bahi Khan Gichki and others v. Bibi Kalsoom
Must read judgment.
2026 M L D 807
[Balochistan]
Before Muhammad Najam-ud-Din Mengal, J
NAWAB BAHI KHAN GICHKI and 4 others---Petitioners
Versus
BIBI KALSOOM---Respondent
Civil Revision No. (T)45 of 2024, decided on 31st October, 2025.
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (VIII of 1961)---
----S.4---Succession Act (XXXIX of 1925), S. 278---Succession---Pre-deceased brother's children---Entitlement---Scope-Letter of administration filed by the respondents was issued in their favour whereas to the extent of pre-deceased brother's children (interveners / petitioners), the same was concurrently declined---Validity---Section 4 4 of of the the Muslim M Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, being on the statute book at the time of filing of the application for grant of Letter of Administration, was not applicable to the present case because it only provides for per stripes share on opening of succession to the children of deceased son and daughter of the propositus; which (Section 4) explicitly was not applicable to the pre-deceased brother's children rather said provision only attracted to the sons and daughters and the relations, who are specifically mentioned in it As regards the question of analogy, notably, the matter of inheritance among Muslims is strictly governed by law and its provisions are well-defined leaving no ambiguity about the persons who are entitled to inheritance in the estate of the deceased -- In the present case, deceased was survived by brothers and sisters and also two sons of pre-deceased brother-In terms of the table of sharers provided in the Mohammadan Law, a full sister is shown to be 1/2 sharer while table of residuaries include full brother's son; the son of pre-deceased sister is not mentioned in the table of sharer nor in the table of residuaries; the children of a pre-deceased sister are included in subsection (2) of S.68 of Mulla's Mohammadan Law, which lays down the list of distant kindred---The distant kindred only inherits when there are no residuaries---Under such circumstances, the properties and other assets of the deceased are required to be distributed amongst the igst the brothers and sisters, who survived ived deceased and if anything is left for distribution, only then it can be given to the distant kindred---In the present case, since the deceased was survived by siblings, resultantly nothing would be left for its distribution amongst the legal heirs of predeceased brothers and sisters--Thus, the Courts below had rightly declined the application of the petitioners, which being well reasoned were not open for interference by High Court---Revision was dismissed, in circumstances.
Khawaja Rashidullah and another v. Khawaja Faridullah PLD 2018 Sindh 129 ref.
Muhammad Ali Kanrani for Petitioners.
Muhammad Ali Khushnood for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 12th September, 2025.