| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2013 SLG 2984 2013 SLD 2984 2013 PLD 34 |
Islamabad High Court
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 14-H of 2012, heard on 18th September, 2012. heard on: 18th September, 2012.
IQBAL HAMEEDUR RAHMAN, CHIEF, JUSTICE
Ali Raza for Petitioner. Syed Nayyab Hassan Gardezi for
Respondent No.1. Sahibzada Muhammad Raees Satti, Standing Counsel for
Respondents Nos. 2 and 3.
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 14-H of 2012, heard on 18th September, 2012. heard on: 18th September, 2012.
IQBAL HAMEEDUR RAHMAN, CHIEF, JUSTICE
Ali Raza for Petitioner. Syed Nayyab Hassan Gardezi for
Respondent No.1. Sahibzada Muhammad Raees Satti, Standing Counsel for
Respondents Nos. 2 and 3.
DR. VIKTOR HACKER
VS
DR. SHAHIDA MANSOOR AND others
Law:
Section:
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---.--- ---.----S. 491---.---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 13(b)---.---Habeas corpus petition---.---Recovery of minor children---.---When the foreign not conclusive---.---Scope---.---Court of foreign country "A" granted sole custody of minor children to the father (petitioner)---.---Mother of minor children brought them to Pakistan---.---Father filed habeas corpus petition contending that mother had unlawfully and in patent violation of orders of court of foreign country "A" removed the minors, and that minors were foreign nationals and could not be brought to Pakistan without his lawful permission and consent---.---Mother contended that passed by court of foreign country "A" was passed in her absence and same was not passed on merits, and that even otherwise such was not conclusive as appeal filed against the same was still pending in the apex court of foreign country "A"---.---Validity---.---Judgment passed by court of foreign country "A" was not a conclusive because firstly it was not delivered on merits, and secondly appeal against said was still pending in the apex court of foreign country "A"---.---Minors were in custody of their real mother, therefore, it could not be held that they were in illegal confinement---.---High Court while dealing with the petition could not assume jurisdiction of executing court of passed by court of foreign country "A"---.---Petition was dismissed with the observation that father might approach the Guardian Judge for custody of minors. PLD 1995 SC 633; 2010 PLD Lah. 48; 1993 SCMR 1690; 2008 YLR 2647; 2007 YLR 399; PLD 1983 SC 280; 2009 MLD 367; 2004 CLD 1407; 2004 CLD 207 and 1997 SCMR 323 ref. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---.--- ---.----S. 491---.---Guardians and Wards Act (VIII of 1890), S. 25---.---Habeas corpus petition---.---Scope---.---Issue of custody of minors---.---High Court while dealing with a petition under S.491, Cr.P.C, had no jurisdiction to decide the issue of custody of minors. (c) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---.--- ---.----S. 491---.---Guardians and Wards Act (VIII of 1890), S. 7---.---Habeas corpus petition---.--- Scope---.--- Appointment of…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492