ایسا اقرار نامہ جو والدہ کے اپنے بچوں کے حق حضانت سے دستبرداری کی بابت ہو سراسر غیر قانونی ہے

P L D 2024 Supreme Court 291 

The delivery of Mahr is one such right, the dutY of which is bestowed upon the husband for the financial support and stability of his wife. Such entitlement to dower has the origin in the HoIy Quran, and the inspiration of the same entitlement has been made part of the statutory law.

Para 352 (5) of the Muhammadan Law provides that the mother is entitled to the custody (Hizanat) of her male child until he has completed the age of seven years and of her female child until she has attained puberty. These rights cannot be denied to her as any such action would be contrary to law. Any agreement related to the custody of minor child would be violative of law and cannot be enforced by a Court of law. This Court in a reported case titled Mst. Beena v. Raja Muhammad and others [PLD 2020 SC 508], at paragraph 8, held that the agreement where mother surrendered the custody of her child or the agreement which stopped the mother to claim his custody is not lawful; it is contrary to the Islamic principles governing Hizanat and the law determining the custody of minors and thus forbidden. An agreement the object or consideration of which is against public policy is void, as stipulated in section 23 of the Contract Act.
It is imperative that the wife must be made a party to the agreements concerning her rights. A wife enjoys exclusive and absolute right over her dower and the same could not be waived via lqrarnama/ Agreement/Compromise and any such document, registered or unregistered, attempting to compromise the wife’s right to dower, especially in the context of familial dissolution, lacks legal validity. Further, any Iqrarnama/ Agreement/Compromise made by the mother waiving her statutory right of Hizanat of a minor child would be violative of law and cannot be enforced by a Court of law.

C.A.1227/2016
Mst. Haseena Bibi v. Abdul Haleem & others
P L D 2024 Supreme Court 291

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Powered by Blogger.

Case Law Search