Recently, a client approached me regarding a delicate case. For privacy, we’ll call him “Aslam.” Aslam had a love marriage with a woman named Aamna. The situation involved some serious complications, as Aamna’s family environment was extremely stressful for her, and there were reports that her relatives were treating her poorly. She eventually fell in love with Aslam and decided to marry him.
Aslam is a responsible businessman who owns a restaurant. After the marriage, Aamna left her home to stay with Aslam. However, the next day, the police from two different stations – South Cantt Lahore Police Station and Raiwind Lahore Police Station – conducted a raid at Aslam’s house and took Aamna away.
When this case reached us, we had two legal options:
- File an FIR claiming that the wife had been abducted.
- File a Habeas Corpus petition under Section 491.
It was crucial to understand the scope of the court’s powers in such cases. Filing the petition in a standard office or police station could have led to false reports being filed against us due to Aamna’s family’s influence in the police. So, we filed the Habeas Corpus petition in a private capacity to ensure legal safety.
The petition was heard by Additional Sessions Judge Mr. Wasim Rafiq. The court also referenced a landmark High Court judgment by Justice Qasim Ali Khan. Justice Khan had established that in cases of runaway marriages, where a girl voluntarily marries someone, the court generally does not intervene to separate them. He emphasized that such marriages have become common, and courts should not be used as a tool to reverse them. Courts intervene only in exceptional circumstances to protect social norms or rights.
The Constitution of Pakistan guarantees the right to life and liberty, including personal security (Article 9). If a girl marries voluntarily and someone, be it her family or anyone else, tries to forcibly take her away, it violates her constitutional rights.
In our case, Section 491 gave the court the authority to recover the girl and ensure she goes with the person she wants. However, the Additional Sessions Judge dismissed our Habeas Corpus petition, stating that since it was a runaway marriage, the matter fell under conjugal rights, and the appropriate remedy would be through family court.
We then filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights in the family court. Family Court Judge Mr. Chaudhry Muhammad Bilal Khan observed that the case was beyond his jurisdiction regarding custody but took note of the orders from the previous Habeas Corpus petition.
As a result, we had to escalate the case to the High Court under Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan, focusing on the right to life and liberty. The petition argued that the girl’s rights were violated because she was forcibly taken from her husband, and the family court or lower courts had failed to act.
High Court Justice Tariq Saleem Sheikh reviewed the petition carefully. He saw that despite multiple applications and procedural hurdles, the girl’s right to liberty and protection of marriage had been violated. He ultimately ordered that the girl be restored to her husband.
This case highlights two key lessons:
- Persistence in legal action: Even if lower courts or family courts are slow or dismissive, higher courts can still intervene.
- Understanding the law deeply: Knowing constitutional rights (Articles 9, 33, 35, and 199), Section 491, and previous judicial precedents is critical in cases of runaway marriages and conjugal rights.
In the end, the girl voluntarily chose to stay with her husband, and the case was resolved successfully.
For lawyers handling such sensitive cases, the responsibility goes beyond filing petitions. A lawyer’s role is to assist the court in understanding the situation, protect clients’ rights, and ensure justice is done efficiently.
This case serves as a strong example of how constitutional rights, legal strategy, and careful court assistance work together to resolve complex family disputes in Pakistan.