Mst. NAUSHABA vs Dr. NASIM And Other
The petitioner sought leave to appeal against the judgment of the Sind High Court, which had dismissed her Constitutional Petition arising from a guardianship matter. The core legal question concerned the interim custody and visitation rights of a minor suckling child, specifically the father's right to temporary custody under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890. The Supreme Court heard the parties and found no ground to interfere with the lower appellate court's order regarding temporary custody. However, by consent of the parties, the Supreme Court modified the arrangement by imposing a condition that the paternal grandfather furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000 to the satisfaction of the Nazir of the High Court to ensure the safe return of the minor. The petition was converted into an appeal and allowed subject to this condition.
- Whether interim custody of a minor suckling child can be granted to the father under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890?
- Can the Supreme Court modify visitation arrangements by consent of the parties subject to the furnishing of a personal bond for the safe return of the minor?
- Section 12, Guardians and Wards Act 1890
ORDER
S.A. NUSRAT, J.--The petitioner seeks leave 'to appeal from the judgment of the Sind High Court dated 19-6-1986 dismissing her Constitutional Petition in a guardianship matter.
2. The respondent moved an application under section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 for the custody of a male suckling child, named Nabeel Punjwani, in the Court of the Civil Judge, Karachi who ordered the respondent, father of the child, to take the custody of the minor on every Friday from petitioner's house at 10-00 a.m. And return him to the petitioner at 4-00 p. m. On petitioner's appeal the above arrangement was modified by the learned Additional District Judge by his order dated 31-5-1986 only to the extent that the time of temporary custody was reduced to three hours from 10-00 a.m. To 1-00 p.m.
3. We heard the learned counsel for the parties and find no ground for interference with the judgment of the learned Additional District Judge. However, by consent of the parties the order of the Additional District Judge shall be maintained subject to the condition that Dr. Nizar A.I, the father of the first respondent, shall furnish persona bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000 to the satisfaction of the Nazir of the High Court for the safe return of the minor to the petitioner on eachoccasion he is taking for three hours. Such personal bond shall be furnished within two weeks and unless the same is furnished the child will not be taken by the first respondent.
The petition is converted into an appeal and allowed in terms of the above directions.