Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLG 4610 = 2026 SLD 4610 = 2026 PLJ 474
Lahore High Court
W.P. No. 64981 of 2025
Presented By: Sultan Tanvir Ahmad JUDGE
M/s. Samran Mushtaq Chaudhry and Arslan Fazil, learned Advocates alongwith Petitioners. Ms. Aaminah Qadir, learned Advocate alongwith respondent-mother for
Respondent No. 2. Dates of hearing: 19 & 24.12.2025.

HARRIS RASHEED and another--Petitioners

VERSUS

LEARNED GUARDIAN JUDGE and 2 others--Respondents

Law: Family Courts Act, 1964

Section: 14

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984

Section: 151

Law: Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Section: 2

Law: West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964

Section: 11(3-A)

Family Courts Act, 1964 (XXXV of 1964)-- ----S. 14--Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984 (10 of 1984), Art. 151--Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908), O.VI R.2--Family jurisdiction--Custody--Visitation rights of minor--Cross-examination--Closing right to further cross-examination--Family jurisdiction dispute relates to custody as well as visitation rights of minor--Respondent No.2 gave her examination-in-chief in form of an affidavit--She was cross-examined on several dates of hearings--The learned Guardian Court closed right of petitioner No.1 (the ‘petitioner-father’) to further cross-examine--Guardian Petition is pending since 2022-- Respondent-mother remained present when, due to various reasons, no cross-examination was conducted--On some scheduled hearing dates cross-examination was conducted until late hours-- Cross-examination so far conducted comprises of about 51-pages--A witness when subjected to unduly lengthy cross-examination, which also consists of many irrelevant and misdirected questions, contradiction, if any, can lose its significance--Duty was imposed on Presiding Officers, who should not remain silent spectators and they are required to be mindful that right of cross-examination is neither unlimited nor unbridled--Trial court should direct counsel to confine him to relevant questions--In pleadings each and every detail is not required to be mentioned--It is evidence which proves pleadings--Mere mentioning of material facts in pleadings is sufficient regarding which parties are required to produce their evidence at trial stage--Appellate Court had not made any mistake while dismissing appeal against order of learned Family Court closing right to further cross-examination respondent-mother dismissed.      [Pp. 475, 476, 477, 478, 479 & 480] A, B, C, D, G, I, J West Pakistan Family Court Act, 1964-- ----S. 11(3-A)--Indecent, scandalous of Frivolous Family Court was also empowered under section 11(3-A) of Family Court Act by itself to put questions to witnesses for purpose of elucidation of any point which it considers material in case--Courts, when so required, must interfere, which possess ample powers to…
πŸ”’
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register