MST. MUNIRA BIBI versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, SHEIKHUPURA
Article 25 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional petition covering juveniles The Guardian Judge and the Appellate Court simultaneously excluded the juvenile's mother's request for custody of minors under the Guardians and Wards Act 1890. As minors when their guardian petitioner challenged the adjudication of the courts under the petitioner, who was the mother of minors, he claimed that it was for the welfare of the minors that the minors be treated as such. Should the defendant's case, which was the father of the minor's father, be it that the applicant was of a bad character who along with others killed her husband and that he had no means of earning a plea? The payer failed to present any credible evidence to support his claim of custody of minors, while defendant Ali (Defendant) Uncle was a teacher and he was caring for minor children and he was studying, while living with corrupt people, the respondent (uncle) was deposed to better care for minors. And that the juvenile did not want to meet the applicant who did not have a home, the trial court correctly observed that it was in the welfare of the minor to stay with the defendant (s), at trial. , The petitioner's request for juvenile detention was rightly dismissed and the appellate court rightly appealed - judgment In the absence of any unlawful interference or instability in the taking, it cannot be interfered with. High court constitutional jurisdiction over juvenile detention, minority welfare
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
