While making claim of dowry articles, is required to prove the case, in requirement of Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984,

6. It is a settled principle of law that purpose of enacting the special law regarding family disputes is to advance justice and to avoid technicalities, which are hindrance in providing ultimate justice to the parties. The West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 was promulgated for the expeditious settlement and disposal of disputes relating to the marriages and other family affairs and special procedure was provided to achieve this object. The purpose of enacting Family Courts Act, 1964 is to frustrate the technicalities for the purpose of justice between the parties in the shortest possible time. The provisions of Civil procedure Code, 1908 as well as Qanun-eShahadat Order, 1984 are not applicable in strictosenso to the proceedings before the Family Court by virtue of Family Courts Act, 1964. As the evidence adduced before the Family Court cannot be evaluated and appraised in the manner as it is appreciated in the cases presented under Civil procedure Code, 1908. A mere fact that a party did not formally prove a document is of no legal consequence. The reference may be made on the case law reported as “Mst. Shakeela Bibi Vs. Muhammad Israr and others” (2012 MLD 756), wherein it has been held that “the stance of husband’s side that bride while making claim of dowry articles, is required to prove the case, in requirement of Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, as held by learned trial Court, not only misconceived, but besides the mandate of law as envisaged in Section 17(1) of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964.” It is further held that “in our society, it is not possible for any bride/wife to keep the record of purchase receipts, prepare the list of dowry articles, and obtained signatures from bridegroom/husband side. It is also tradition that in-laws, of any bride/wife are extended esteem respect and it is considered an insult to prepare the dowry list for the purposes of obtaining signatures from them.” The reliance may also be placed on the case “Muhammad Habib v. Mst. Safia Bibi and others” (2008 SCMR 1584) and “Mirza Arshad Baig v. ADJ” (2005 SCMR 1740).  

Part of Judgment : 

LAHORE HIGH COURT MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN 

WP- Family Law
8654-14

2014 LHC 6781