Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD NAWAZ versus MST. SHAMIM MAI

ection Section 7 ? Law in Evidence (10 of 1984), Article 128 - DNA Test ? Suit for recovery of jurisdictional dowry articles, Dover money restitution case for defendant / spouse Filed by, this is a family court hearing. etition The applicant / husband, while pointing to this case, denied two minor daughters and petition for permission to take DNA test petitioner / husband's application was dismissed by Family Court as well as Lower Appellate Court. The record was brought in which states that the two minors were born when the plaintiff was legally married to the defendant's wife and did not dispute the case that the minor girls were not born of the parties. The statement was taken for the first time - nothing was recorded by the applicant / husband to prove that they had disputed their legal justification right after the birth of the children. In the suit, the DNA test was always performed with the consent of the person concerned and no such consent was available. consent Once DNA is not given, DNA test cannot be done - High Court refuses to interfere with orders passed by two courts. Constitutional requests were rejected in the circumstances, [Page 896] A&B

P L D 2017 Lahore 892

Before Habib Ullah Amir, J

MUHAMMAD NAWAZ—Petitioner

versus

Mst. SHAMIM MAI and 4 others—Respondents

Writ Petition No.9730 of 2015, decided on 16th January, 2017.

Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)—

—S. 7— Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 128—DNA Test— Scope—Suit for recovery of dowry articles, dower amount nn maintenance for herself and minors was filed by respondent/wife the same was pending trial before Family Court—Petitioner/husband, during pendency of the suit, disowned two minor daughters and sought permission to conduct DNA Test— Application of petitioner / husband was dismissed by Family Court as well as by Lower Appellate Court— Validity— Birth certificates of two minor girls were brought on record which depicted that both minor girls were born when plaintiff was legally wedded wife of defendant and he did not dispute the Plea that minor girls were not born out of the wedlock of parties was raised for the first time in written statement—Nothing was brought on record from the side of petitioner/husband to establish that he had disputed legitimacy of children soon after their birth— Petitioner/husband remained silent till he filed written statement in the suit—DNA Test was always conducted with the consent of the person concerned and no such consent was available—Once consent was not given, DNA Test could not be cond— High Court declined to interfere in orders passed by two courts below—Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances, [pp. 896] A & B

Mst. Shamshad Bbi v. Bushra Bibi and 3 others PLD 2009 Isl. 11 and Naseer Ahmed v. Mst. Azrah and another PLD 2010 Kar. 61 distinguished.

Ghazala Tehsin Zohra v. Mehr Ghulam Dastagir Khan and another PLD 2015 SC 327; Mst. Shamim Akhtar v. Additional District Judge, Gujranwala and another PLD 2015 Lah 500 and Khizar Hayat Additional District Judge, Kabirwala and 2 others PLD zOlO Lah. 42-rel.

Sh. Dilawar Hussain, Advocate.

Date of hearing; 16th January, 2017

female advocates from Panjan Kisan lawyer