Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: Sheikh ABDUL SALEEM VS Respondent: S.H.O., POLICE STATION GARDEN TOWN, LAHORE
Court Name: Lahore High Court Judge(s): Fakhar-un-Nisa Khokhar Title: Sheikh ABDUL SALEEM vs S.H.O., POLICE STATION GARDEN TOWN, LAHORE Case No.: Writ Petition No. 10898 of 1994 Date of Judgment:1994-10-17 Reported As: 1995 MLD 1144 Result: Petition dismissed
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT The petitioner has filed the instant petition stating therein that petitioner's brother-in-law contracted marriage with respondent No.2, 16 years ago and out of this wedlock three children, namely, Zaishan, Usman and Baby Medeha were born. The relations of the spouses have become strained and the respondent has filed a suit for dissolution of marriage and also an application under section 25-A of the Guardians and Wards Act for the custody of the minors. The learned Guardians Judge passed a restraint order for not removing the minors from the jurisdiction of the Guardians and Wards Court at Karachi. The minors were removed from the jurisdiction of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge (Mrs. Tahira Mohsin) Karachi, South and the concerned Court issued warrant for search of the minors. The petitioner has alleged that the respondent No. 1 has raided the house of the petitioner and insulted the women-folk. He has prayed for a restraint order passed by this Court not to harass the petitioner in any illegal manner. 2. The respondent No. 1 is present in person. He has filed the para-wise comments. He has submitted in his para-wise comments since he was possessed of a warrant of search by a Court of competent jurisdiction and there was a direction by the learned District and Sessions Judge. Lahore for execution and production of the minors residing with respondent No. 2 at H/No. 240, Atta Turk Block, New Garden Town, Lahore and House No. 161 Tariq Block, New Garden Town Lahore, so in compliance of the order of the learned District and Sessions Judge the respondent has raided the house of the petitioner and he has not misbehaved with any of the family members of the petitioner. 3. I have heard both the parties and have also seen the warrant under section 100 of Cr.P.C. Issued in Guardians and Wards Case No.210/94 (Mst. Nahid Naz v. Muhammad Bashir Khan) for the
---
## Page 2
production of the minors. The respondent has not acted in any manner which is prejudicial and in violation of law and beyond his jurisdiction. The instant petition has been filed just to obstruct the processes already issued by the Courts of competent jurisdiction, I cannot stop the legal processes. The instant petition has no substance. It is dismissed with no order as to costs.