Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: ZAHOOR AHMAD and another VS Respondent: Mst. FAHIMIA HAFEEZ and 2 others
Court Name: Peshawar High Court Judge(s): Waqar Ahmad Seth, Shah Jehan Khan Akhundzada Title: ZAHOOR AHMAD and another vs Mst. FAHIMIA HAFEEZ and 2 others Case No.: Writ Petition No,313-B of 2012 Date of Judgment:2012-08-16 Reported As: 2012 CLC 1932 Result: Petition dismissed
Judgment ORDER ' WAQAR AHMAD SETH, J.--- This writ petition is directed against the concurrent judgment and decree dated 21-2-2012 of Family Judge/Court, District Karak and judgment and decree dated 12- 5-2012 of learned appellate court, whereby the custody of the minor namely Muhammad Mushaf Jamal aged about 4 years was allowed to remain with the respondent No,1, who is the real mother of the minor, whereas petitioner No,1 is the grandfather and petitioner No,2 is father, living abroad. 2. In support of the above petition, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that the two courts below have not taken into consideration the welfare of the minor and had totally ignored the serious disease i,e, Hepatitis 'C', which is contagious disease and that there is every possibility that virus of the said disease would transfer to the minor if he remained in the custody of the respondent No, 1. After arguing the case at some length, learned counsel requested the court that he will be satisfied if the direction/observation is made that father (petitioner No,2) is entitled to see his child periodically. 3. Arguments heard and record perused. 4. There are concurrent findings of two courts below on the question of welfare of minor and therefore the same cannot be interfered within the constitutional petition. Moreover, the age of the minor is about four years and therefore, the mother is entitled to the custody as a matter of right under the Muslim law upto the age of hazanat. 5. We, therefore, are not inclined to admit the above petition but before dismissing the above petition, however, we may observe that the petitioner No,2 being the father is entitled to see his child. It will be open to the petitioner No,2 to approach the original family court through an
---
## Page 2
application for fixing time to allow him to see the child once in a week after making into consideration the convenience of both the parties and of the minor. 6. With the above observation, this petition is dismissed in limine. Observation accordingly.