Jan Muhammad V. Humaira Allah Dita and another ,
Bench: Rozi Khan Barach
📝 AI Summary — Plain-Language Overview
This case from the Balochistan High Court involved a dispute over dower, dowry articles, and maintenance. The wife had filed a family suit against her husband seeking these claims. The husband contested the suit and, during the evidence stage, filed an application asking the Family Court to send a document called the Qabeen Nama (a marriage-related document dated 31.12.2011) for expert examination, alleging that its back portion had been tampered with in the wife's favor. He relied on Article 59 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order (the law of evidence) and Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code.
The Family Judge dismissed this application, and the husband challenged that dismissal before the High Court through a constitutional petition.
The High Court upheld the Family Court's decision. It explained that the Family Courts Act, 1964 was specifically designed to resolve family disputes quickly and simply, cutting through technical legal procedures. Under Section 17 of that Act, the normal rules of the Civil Procedure Code and the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order do not strictly apply to family court proceedings. Citing a Supreme Court precedent, the Court reaffirmed that this exclusion exists precisely to avoid technical delays and ensure speedy justice in family matters.
As a result, the petition was dismissed, confirming that family courts have discretion to bypass such technical evidentiary applications in the interest of swift resolution of family disputes.
بلوچستان ہائی کورٹ کے اس مقدمے کا تعلق حق مہر، جہیز کے سامان اور نان نفقہ کے تنازع سے تھا۔ بیوی نے اپنے شوہر کے خلاف یہ دعوے لے کر فیملی سوٹ دائر کیا تھا۔ شوہر نے مقدمے کی مخالفت کی اور شہادت کے مرحلے پر فیملی کورٹ میں ایک درخواست دائر کی جس میں استدعا کی گئی کہ "قابین نامہ" نامی دستاویز، جو نکاح سے متعلق ہے اور 31 دسمبر 2011 کی تاریخ رکھتی ہے، ماہرانہ جانچ کے لیے بھیجی جائے۔ اس کا موقف تھا کہ اس دستاویز کے پچھلے حصے میں بیوی کے حق میں ردوبدل کی گئی ہے۔ اس نے اپنے موقف کی بنیاد قانونِ شہادت آرڈر کے آرٹیکل 59 اور ضابطہ دیوانی کی دفعہ 151 پر رکھی۔
فیملی جج نے یہ درخواست مسترد کر دی، جس پر شوہر نے اس فیصلے کو آئینی درخواست کے ذریعے ہائی کورٹ میں چیلنج کیا۔
ہائی کورٹ نے فیملی کورٹ کے فیصلے کو برقرار رکھا۔ عدالت نے وضاحت کی کہ فیملی کورٹس ایکٹ 1964 خاص طور پر اس مقصد کے لیے بنایا گیا ت
Generated from the full judgment text below — not a substitute for reading the actual opinion.
2022 Y L R 1123 [Balochistan] Before Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Rozi Khan Barrech, JJ JAN MUHAMMAD--- Petitioner Versus HUMAIRA ALLAH DITA and another ---Respondents Constitution Petition No. 1032 of 2019, decided on 2nd July, 2020. Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964) --- ----S. 17 & Preamble ---Object of Family Courts Act, 1964 ---Provisions of Qanun- e- Shahadat, 1984 and Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 not to apply--- Scope ---Petitioner assailed the dismissal of his application under Art. 59 of the Qanun- e-Shahadat, 1984, read with S.151, C.P.C. for examination of a document through expert ---Validity ---Family Courts Act, 1964, was promulgated for the expeditious settlement and disposal of disputes relating to the marriages and other family affairs and special p rocedure was provided to achieve such object ---Purpose of enacting Family Courts Act, 1964, was to frustrate the technicalities for the purpose of justice between the parties in the shortest possible time ---Provisions of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 as well as Qanun -e-Shahadat, 1984, were not applicable in stricto sensu to the proceedings before the Family Court by virtue of S.17 of the Family Courts Act, 1964--- Trial Court after going through the relevant law had rightly dismissed the application- --Constitutional petition was dismissed. Farzana Rasool v. Dr. Muhammad Bashir 2011 SCMR 1361 rel. Khurshid Ahmed Khosa for Petitioner. Syed Saleem Akhtar for Respondent No.1. Date of hearing: 25th June, 2020. JUDGMENT ROZI KHAN BARRECH, J .---The petitioner has assailed order dated 17.09.2019 (hereinafter "the impugned Order") passed by learned Family Judge -II, Quetta, (hereinafter "the trial Court") whereby application under Article 59 of Qanun- e-Shahadat Order read with section 151, C.P.C. for examination of t he Qabeen Nama dated 31.12.2011 through expert filed by the petitioner was dismissed.
2. Facts of the case are that the respondent filed a suit for recovery of dower amount, dowry articles and maintenance before the learned trial Court. The suit was contes ted by the petitioner by means of filing written statement on legal and factual grounds. When the case was fixed for evidence of the parties, the petitioner filed an application under section 59 of Qanun- e-Shahadat Order read with section 151, C.P.C. for e xamination of Qabeen Nama dated 31.12.2011 through experts with the allegations that while the backside of Qabeen Nama has been got tempered by the respondent in her favour. The application was contested by the respondent by means of filing rejoinder on le gal as well as on factual grounds.
3. After hearing of learned counsel for the parties, the learned Family Judge -II, Quetta, dismissed the application filed by the petitioner on 17.09.2019. Hence this petition.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have minutely gone through the available record. It is a settled principle of law that purpose of enacting the special law regarding family disputes is to advance justice and to avoid technicalities, which are hindrance in providing ultimate ju stice to the parties. The West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 was promulgated for the expeditious settlement and disposal of disputes relating to the marriages and other family affairs and special procedure was provided to achieve this object. The purpos e of enacting Family Courts Act, 1964 is to frustrate the technicalities for the purpose of justice between the parties in the shortest possible time. The provisions of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 as well as Qanun- e-Shahadat Order, 1984 are not applicable i n stricto sensu to the proceedings before the Family Court by virtue of Family Courts Act, 1964. In section 17 of the West Pakistan Family Courts, Act, 1964 that applicability of C.P.C. and Qanun- e-Shahadat to proceedings before Family Court has been excluded. The august Supreme Court in the case of Farzana Rasool v. Dr. Muhammad Bashir 2011 SCMR 1361 has held that, "object of exclusion of C.P.C. and Qanun- e-Shahadat Order, 1984 was to avoid technicalities by providing a short, simple and speedy methodology for settlement and disposal of disputes relating to family matters". The trial Court after going to the relevant law rightly dismissed the application filed by the petitioner, as such, the petition filed by the petitioner is hereby dismissed in liminie. SA/231/Bal. Petition dismissed.