Giran Naz v. State,

PLD 2010 Quetta 61Balochistan High CourtConstitutional Law2010

Bench: Qazi Faez Isa

Share on WhatsApp
P L D 2010 Quetta 61 Before Qazi Faez Isa, C J and Syeda Tahira Safdar, J Mst. GIRAN NAZ alias SHAGUFTA BIBI ---Petitioner Versus THE STATE and 2 others ---Respondents Constitutional Petition No.97 of 2010, decided on 29th April, 2010. Constitution of Pakistan (1973) --- ----Arts. 4, 31, 35 & 199 ---Constitutional petition ---Petitioners sought directions to Superintendent, Dar -ul-Aman to arrange their marriage and release female petitioner from Dar-ul-Aman thereafter ---Court below did not permit petitioners to contract court marriag e and set the pre -condition of settlement with the parents of the girl and her custody to them - Validity -Article 4 of the Constitution mandated that no person could be prevented from doing or be hindered in doing that which was not prohibited by law and tha t it was an inalienable right of every citizen to be treated in accordance with law ---Law did not prevent an adult lady from marrying an adult man of her choice ---Article 35 of the Constitution required the State to protect the institution of marriage ---High Court ensured during hearing of the case that female petitioner was old enough to understand the ramifications of her decision, therefore, petitioners could not be prevented from marrying each other ---Orders of courts below were set aside and Superinten dent Dar -ul-Aman was directed to arrange the marriage of petitioners and allow the female to leave Dar -al-Aman ---Petition was accepted. Surah Ar -Rum (30) Verse 21; Surah Al -Baqara (2), Verse 187; Surah Ash -Shura (42), Verse 11; Surah Az -Zumar (39), Ver se 6; Surah Al -Naba (78), Verse 8 and Surah An -Nahl (16), Verse 72 quoted. Masoom Khan Kakar for Petitioners. Nasrullah Achakzai, Addl. A. -G. for Respondents. Date of hearing: 27th April, 2010. JUDGMENT QAZI FAEZ ISA, C.J. ---Petitioner No.1, M st. Giran Naz alias Shagufta Bibi daughter of Babu Dostain, and Petitioner No.2, Noor Ullah son of Shaista Khan, have filed the instant petition under Article 199 of the Constitution seeking directions to be issued to Superintendent Dar -ul-Aman, Quetta to arrange their marriage according to injunctions of Islam and thereafter Petitioner No.1 to be released from Dar -ul-Aman as wife of petitioner No.2. The petitioners are residents of District Loralai. Petitioner No.1 left her house because her brothers wer e not willing to give her hand to the petitioner No.2 in marriage and she took shelter in Daru -ul-Aman, Quetta in February, 2009. As per the affidavit of the petitioner No.1 her father is dead and she has a mother, three brothers and a married sister. Howe ver, only one brother, namely Din Muhammad opposed the marriage and sought custody of petitioner No.1. An application before the Judicial Magistrate, Loralai was submitted seeking court marriage of the petitioners. The Judicial Magistrate however, dismis sed the said application vide order dated 25 -7-2009 on the ground that, "it is not necessary that court marriage be held at Loralai as the lady is in the custody of Dar -ul-Aman Quetta" and advised to submit application be filed before the competent Court a t Quetta. Thereafter, the petitioner No.2 filed an application before the Sessions Judge, Quetta, who rejected the same vide order dated 16 -11-2009. The operative portion of the order passed by the Sessions Judge, Quetta reads as under: -- "Let the matter be resolved between the parties first and then custody of the respondent No.1 can be shifted to her parents or applicant which too with her consent and satisfaction of concerned Court i.e. Judicial Magistrate -IV, Quetta." The petitioner No.1 thereafter approached the Judicial Magistrate IV, Quetta, who after hearing the parties rejected the application vide order dated 26 -11-2009 as amicable settlement had not been arrived at. Hence the instant Constitutional Petition. The question for consideration be fore this Court is whether the impugned orders whereby the petitioners were not permitted to marry and or such marriage was made dependent on settling the matter with the girl's family was in accordance with the Constitution of Pakistan and in accordance w ith the personal law of the parties, who are Muslims. Article 4 of the Constitution of Pakistan mandates that no person can be prevented from or be hindered in doing that which is not prohibited by law and that it is the inalienable right of every citizen to be treated in accordance with law. Pakistan law does not .prevent an adult lady to marry an adult man of her choice. Under the Principles of Policy Chapter of the Constitution of Pakistan Muslims are enabled to live their lives in accordance with the fundamental concepts of Islam (Article 31) and the State is required to protect the institution of marriage (Article 35). The Holy Qur'an mentions the tranquility, beauty and love to be found in marriage: "And among His Signs is this that He created f or you mates from among yourselves, that you may dwell in tranquility with them, and He has put love and mercy between your (hearts): Verily in that are signs for those who reflect." Surah Ar -Rum (30), verse 21. And spouses are the adornment of eac h other, "They (women) are your garments, and you (men) are their garments" Surah Ar -Baqarah (2), Verse 187. Almighty Allah, the Creator of the heavens and earth, reminds us about the importance of creating mates; "The Creator of the heavens and the earth, he has made for you mates from amongst yourselves." Surah Ash -Shura (42), Verse 11. "He created you (all) from a single person, then made from him his wife" Surah Az -Zumar (39), Verse 6. "And We have created you in pairs." Surah Al -Naha (78) , Verse 8. "And Allah has made for you mates of your own kind." Surah An -Nahl (16), Verse 72. In the amazingly wonderful and beautiful world of the Creator marriage and spouses have a central role and family members cannot be permitted to prevent an adult man and woman from marrying or force them into a relationship that they do not willing enter into or one that they may abhor or hate. Despite the fact that the petitioner No.1 has been in seclusion in the Dar -ul- Aman at Quetta for over a year she is still resolute and determined to marry petitioner No.2 and has also stated so before us. Moreover, one of us (Mrs. Justice Syeda Tahira Safdar) took her aside in Chambers and asked the petitioner No.1 to remove her veil to ensure that she was old enough an d understood the ramifications of her decision and found that petitioner No.1 appeared to be a major and that she was adamant to get married to petitioner No.2. Under such circumstances the petitioners cannot be prevented to enter into marriage with ea ch other. In view of the fact that the petitioner No.1 is a yateem, insofar as her father is dead, it also falls upon us to ensure that a reasonable amount is fixed as her mehr because the Holy Qur'an prescribes, that, "And give to the women their mehr" Surah An -Nisa (4), Verse 4 "They ask your instruction concerning the women, say: Allah instructs you about them, and what hath been recited unto you in the Book concerning the orphan girls whom you give not the portions prescribed, and yet whom ye d esire to marry, and the children who are weak and oppressed, and that you stand firm for justice to orphans. There is not a good deed which you do, but Allah is well -acquainted therewith." Surah An -Nisa (4), Verse 127. We accordingly set aside the af orementioned orders and direct the Superintendent Dar -ul- Aman Quetta to arrange the marriage of the petitioner No.1 with petitioner No.2 and, unless the petitioner No.2 demands a higher amount as mehr, fix the mehr at Rs.100,000 (Rupees one hundred thousan d only). After the performance of nikah the petitioner No.1 be permitted to leave Dar -ul-Aman in the company of petitioner No.2 as his wife. Petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. A.R.K./30/Q Petition allowed
This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error, let us know.

Related judgments

PLJ 2017 Quetta 58 (DB)

Balochistan High Court · 2018

Authority of Selection Board cannot be Challenged

PLJ 2018 · Balochistan High Court · 2018

Locus Poenitentiae--In appointment of Person

PLJ 2018 · Balochistan High Court · 2018

Iftikhar Chodhary's decision in a Guardian Case

PLJ 2014 SC 157 · Balochistan High Court · 2014

Leave to Appeal in a Guardian Case

PLJ 2014 SC 157 · Balochistan High Court · 2014