Right of cross examination in a family suit
PLJ 2015 Lahore · Lahore High Court (Multan Bench)
This case involved a family court dispute in Taunsa Sharif, where a wife, Mst. Shaheen Bibi, had filed a suit against her husband, Muhammad Irfan, for jactitation of marriage (a declaration that no valid marriage existed), or alternatively for dissolution of marriage through khula.
During the trial, the wife and one other witness gave their statements in court, but the husband's lawyer could not cross-examine them right away because he was busy in another court. The next two hearing dates were disrupted because lawyers were on strike. When the case came up again, the Family Court judge refused to let the husband's counsel cross-examine the witnesses and closed his right to do so, even though his lawyer was present in court that day.
The husband challenged this decision in the Lahore High Court, arguing the order was passed in haste and unfairly denied him a basic right. The wife's side argued he had already had enough chances and only had himself to blame.
The High Court agreed with the husband. It held that the right to cross-examine witnesses under Section 11(3) of the Family Courts Act, 1964 is a valuable legal right that cannot be taken away without strong justification. Since the delays were due to genuine reasons, not bad faith, and the lawyer was present and willing to proceed, the court struck down the Family Court's order and sent the case back, allowing cross-examination to proceed, with clear conditions to avoid further delay. This case reinforces that courts must have solid grounds before denying a party's right to cross-examine witnesses.
یہ مقدمہ تونسہ شریف کی فیملی کورٹ میں ایک خاندانی تنازعہ سے متعلق تھا، جس میں بیوی، مسماۃ شاہین بی بی، نے اپنے شوہر محمد عرفان کے خلاف تنسیخِ نکاح (یعنی اس بات کا اعلان کہ کوئی جائز نکاح موجود نہیں) یا متبادل طور پر خلع کے ذریعے نکاح ختم کرنے کا دعویٰ دائر کیا تھا۔
مقدمے کی سماعت کے دوران بیوی اور ایک اور گواہ نے عدالت میں اپنے بیانات دیے، مگر شوہر کا وکیل انہیں فوری طور پر جرح (کراس ایگزامینیشن) نہ کر سکا کیونکہ وہ کسی دوسری عدالت میں مصروف تھا۔ اس کے بعد اگلی دو تاریخوں پر وکلاء کی ہڑتال کی وجہ سے کارروائی متاثر رہی۔ جب مقدمہ دوبارہ سماعت کے لیے آیا تو فیملی کورٹ کے جج نے شوہر کے وکیل کو گواہوں پر جرح کرنے کی اجازت دینے سے انکار کر دیا اور اس کا یہ حق ختم کر دیا، حالانکہ اس دن اس کا وکیل عدالت میں موجود تھا۔
شوہر نے اس فیصلے کو لاہور ہائی کورٹ میں چیلنج کیا اور مؤقف اختیار کیا کہ یہ حکم جلد بازی میں د