IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Cr. Misc.
Application No.1217 of 2024
|
DATE |
ORDER WITH
SIGNATUREs OF JUDGEs |
For
hearing of main case
---------------------------------------------
21.05.2025
Mr. Muhammad Hanif
Chandio & Ms. Saima Shahreen Abbaasi, advocate for
applicant
Mr. Noor Muhammad Dayo, Assistant Attorney General
Mr. Qamaruddin
Nohri, D.P.G.
Respondent No.4 Mohsin
Raza
------------------------------------
Applicant
Shujjaat Hussain, grandfather of minor Jarar Asghar, has impugned order dated
17.10.2024 passed by learned Sessions Judge Karachi East in Habeas Corpus
Petition No.250/2024 on the ground that custody of his grandson was removed
from Pakistan to Madagascar on 26.06.2023. Learned Sessions Judge Karachi East dismissed
the same with the following observations:
“At the very outset, it is observed
that at no point of time this court has ever issued directions to the FIA or
Airport authorities to ensure that minor may not travel abroad; learned counsel
for the applicant has conceded that he has already invoked jurisdiction of
Family Court under provision of Guardian & Wards Act. This Court is not the
competent forum to decide any misfeasance or nonfeasance of FIA immigration at
Jinnah International Airport under these proceedings; suffice it to observe
that no directions were issued to the FIA immigration as such no order of this
court is flouted by them. Applicant may seek his remedy if he is aggrieved of
some acts and omissions of FIA Immigration officials at Jinnah International
Airport at appropriate forum if he is advised so. With the above observation,
application in hand is declined accordingly.”
2. Counsel
for applicant submits that custody of minor has been removed illegally from
Pakistan as the applicant possesses Pakistani passport of his minor grandson,
therefore, this Court may issue direction to the respondents to produce the
minor before the Family Court. He further submits that Respondent No.4 Mohsin Raza furnished surety
before learned Family Court with the undertaking that custody of minor will not
be removed from Pakistan and he has committed defiance of the Court’s orders,
therefore, this Court may direct him to produce alleged detenue.
3. Respondent
No.4 Mohsin Raza present in
Court submits that he has executed P.R. bond before learned Family Court on the
basis that Mst. Zeeshan Moez Mamodaly is his relative and
at the relevant time she was residing with him.
4. Learned
Assistant Attorney General submits that issue involved between the parties
pertains to Family Court and the parties may be directed to appear before the
concerned Family Court for decision on merits.
5. Heard
learned counsel for applicant, learned Assistant Attorney General, learned
D.P.G. and respondent No.4 and perused the material available on record.
6. Admittedly,
the matter between the parties pertains to the custody of minor, who was
removed from Pakistan in the year 2023 and respondent No.4 furnished bond that
custody of the minor will not be removed from Pakistan. Since this is the
domain of Family Court, therefore, learned Sessions Judge Karachi East has
rightly observed that no case for taking cognizance of the matter under Section
491, Cr.PC has been made out.
7. In view
of above, both the parties are directed to approach the concerned Family Court
for redressal of their grievance in accordance with
law.
Instant
criminal revision application is disposed of in the above terms.
J
U D G E
Gulsher/PS