Step 1 of 8
Welcome!
Let's learn how to use the search features effectively.
Step 1 of 7
Welcome!
Let's learn how to use the search features effectively.
Latest Judgments (All Jurisdictions within Pakistan)
Khanan VS DCO Khoat
Summary: Arts. 199, 4, 9, 10 & 15 Constitution of Pakistan, 1973.S.3 MPO, 1961.Arrest and detention of suspected person--Right of liberty was to be guarded by Court.
Khanan vs DCO Khoat
Summary: S.3 MPO,Art 4,9,10,15 Constitution of Pak:Right of liberty,preventive detention order of DC
MUHAMMAD NAWAZ VS THE STATE
Summary: Summary pending.
MUHAMMAD IQBAL THROUGHDULY AUTHORIZED ATTORNEY VS MUHAMMAD AHMED RAMZANI
Summary: Summary pending.
MST SHAHEENA FIRDOUS VS CHIEF SECRETARY SINDH
Summary: Summary pending.
SYED AZHAR ALI SHAH VS SECRETARY AGRICULTURE GOVERNMENT OF SINDH
Summary: Summary pending.
JAVED KHAN VS CHAIRMAN NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU ISLAMABAD
Summary: Summary pending.
Mrs. Ambreen Tariq Awan, Advocate d/o Tariq Ismail Awan, Rio. 10/G Model Town, Lahore Petitioner Versus Federal Government of Pakistan through Secretary Mb o Law & Justice, Islamabad. Respondent Counsel for the petitioner Nil Counsel for the Federation Mr. Muhammad Nazir Abbasi, Advocate For NADRA Mr. Saqib Jamal, Manager (Legal) For Religious Affairs Hafiz Abdul Qudoos, Asstt Director
Summary: Background:
The petitioner challenged sections 7, 17, and 27 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890, claiming that these sections were repugnant to the injunctions of Islam. The petitioner argued that these sections, which deal with the appointment and duties of guardians by the court, contradict Islamic principles, specifically regarding the roles and rights of guardianship, typically favoring the father as the natural guardian.
-----Issues:
1- Whether sections 7, 17, and 27 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890, are repugnant to the injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Holy Quran and Sunnah.
2- Whether the court has the authority to appoint or remove guardians based on the principles of justice and welfare of the minor.
-----Holding/Reasoning/Outcome:
The Federal Shariat Court dismissed the petition.
The court found that the sections in question empower the court to act in the best interest of the minor, aligning with the principles of justice in Islam. The court emphasized that Islamic jurisprudence grants authority to the courts to appoint or remove guardians as necessary for the welfare of the minor, which is consistent with the injunctions of Islam.
The court noted that the petitioner did not provide any specific Quranic verses or Hadith that directly contradicted the impugned sections. Additionally, the court highlighted that its jurisdiction is limited to determining the repugnancy of laws based on the Quran and Sunnah, not on juristic opinions.
The petition was also found procedurally deficient, as the petitioner failed to appear before the court despite multiple notices.
The petition was dismissed as being without merit and procedurally flawed.
Muhammad Aslam s/o Muhammad Ali Caste Joyia r/o Chak No. 229/E.B, Tehsil Burewala District Vehari Appellant Versus The State
Summary: Summary Pending
KHALID JAVAID VS THE ST ATE
Summary: Summary pending.