Sher Baz & another Vs Ahmad Sher etc

Stereo. H C J D A 38 Judgment Sheet

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE

(JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT)

Crl. Revision No.37600 of 2026 Sher Baz etc vs. Ahmad Sher etc

Writ Petition No.40818 of 2026 Ahmad Sher vs Station House Officer etc

Date of Hearing: 01.10.2026

Petitioner: Ch. Muhammad Imran Mayo, Advocate for revision petitioner.

Malik Muhammad Azam Awan, Advocate for writ petitioner.

Respondents: Mr. Faza Ullah, Assistant Advocate General with Fazal, SI.

Khalid Ibn-i-Aziz, J. Through this single judgment, I shall decide, criminal revision filed by petitioners namely Sher Baz and Safina Khatoon (Parents of Muhammad Sheraz) and constitutional matter filed by Ahmad Sher (father of Mst. Kiran Shaheen in WP No. 40818/2026) as both these matters arises from order dated 20.5.2026 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Khushab (hereinafter, the “Sessions Court”)

2.Brief facts of the case are that Mst. Kiran Shaheen and Muhammad Sheraz got married on 18.04.2026 and whereafter she started residing in Lahore with her in-laws. On, 16.04.2026 her father/Ahmad Sher lodged FIR No.152/2026 under section 365-B P.P.C. at Police Station Mitha Tiwana District Khushab against un- known persons for abducting her daughter Mst. Kiran Shaheen. Mst.

Kiran Shaeen got recorded her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

On 30.4.2026 in the said case wherein she categorically denied allegation leveled in FIR. Later on, Ahmad Sher father of Mst. Kiran Shaheen, filed complaint u/s 552 Cr.P.C. before the said Sessions Court where vide order dated 06.5.2026, Court directed SHO and

WP No.40818/2026 2

Investigating Officer to get recover Mst. Kiran Shaheen and produce her before it. In compliance to said order she was produced and proceedings were adjourned, in order to confirm the, genuineness of Nikah. On 20.05.2026 the learned Court, decided lis by declaring Mst.

Kiran Shaheen a “child” under sixteen years of age and sent her to Shelter home (Dar-ul-Aman) Khushab.

3.Learned Counsel for petitioner(s) put their respective claims in support over custody of Mst. Kiran Shaheen, however, are unanimous that impugned order of sending Mst. Kiran Shaheen to Shelter Home is illegal.

4.Learned law officer, oppose both the petitions, by supporting the impugned order, maintaining that in prevailing circumstances, learned Court had rightly passed order.

5.Heard.

6.This Court observes that both the parties under lis are affected by the proceedings carried out by the learned Court under section 552 Criminal Procedure Code 1898: -

Power to compel restoration of abducted female.--Upon complaint made to a [District Magistrate] on oath of the abduction or unlawful detention of a woman or of female child under the age of sixteen years, for any unlawful purpose, he may make an order for the immediate restoration of such woman to her liberty, or of such female child to her husband, parent, guardian or other person having the lawful charge of such child, and may compel compliance with such order, using such force as may be necessary.

For the purpose of invoking proceedings, law requires a “complaint” disclosing facts about “abduction” of a “female child” under the age of “sixteen years” instituted by a “person” claiming her custody on “oath”. It has been observed that, on 2.05.2026 Ahmad Sher, filed a

WP No.40818/2026 3

complaint, recorded his statement and put his claim of under sixteen years of Mst. Kiran Shaheen by relying on a Birth Registration Certificate, issued on 24.04.2026 from Union Council No. 15 Jabbi, Tehsil & District Khushab mentioning date of birth as 20.12.2013. It is pertinent to analyze order dated 11.5.2026, before, discussing impugned order dated 20.5.2026 wherein which Mst. Kiran Shaheen when was produced in warrant u/s 552 Cr.P.C. before learned Sessions Judge, Khushab for better understanding the facts, order is reproduce: -

Present:

1.Petitioner with Counsel.

2.DDPP for the State.

3.Respondent No. 3 and 4 with Counsel

4.Farhat Abbas SI/SHO, Fazal ur Rehman SI/I.O. and Rashida Mubeen 415/LC with abductee Kiran Shaheen.

At the very outset, attending SHO and Investigating Officer apprised that abductee has performed Nikah with Muhammad Sheraz accused of case FIR No. 152/24 registered under Section 365-B PPC Police Station Mitha Tiwana and as per Nikahnama dated 18.04.2026, the age of bride is 18 years. Moreover, abductee on 30.04.2026 got recorded statement before the Court of Mr. Imran Muhammad Khan, Magistrate Section-30, Khushab wherein she categorically stated that she has voluntarily contracted marriage with the accused. However, I.O. could not verify the validity of the Nikah due to paucity of time and requests that time be given(underlining has been provided for emphasis). Conversely. Petitioner and his Counsel apprised that till verification of Nikah, abductee be handed over to the complainant (father of the abductee) The counsel for respondents No.3 and 4 while opposing the request maintained that abductee is not willing to accompany the father as she apprehends danger to her life. When asked, the abductee, she categorically stated that she wants to go with her husband(emphasis supplied).

In the given situation, it is deemed just and proper that abductee be allowed to accompany with the accused till the verification of Nikahnama. To come up for verification and further arguments on On perusal of above said order and in the light of statement made by “alleged abductee” in proceedings initiated under section 552 Cr.P.C.

WP No.40818/2026 4

left no room to proceed further, but astonishingly, the learned Court kept pending proceedings till 20.05.2026 and on said date, culminated proceedings by declaring her “Child” under sixteen years of age by wrongly invoking “The Punjab Child Marriage Restraint Act 2026” (hereinafter the Act 2026) as well as applying Rule nisi in habeas corpus as no such powers available under section 552 Cr.P.C to pass order of detention for which no one seek for, furthermore, this court has observed with great concern that for invoking such proceedings the courts must look into the claim with the material relied by a person calling for production of “alleged minor” and even after the production before the Court, if, detenue rebuts the allegation of “minority” than the court must stop proceedings under this section.

It has been found by this Court that, on perusal of the impugned order the learned Court, had lost sight to the provision under section 552 Cr.P.C and fell in error by wrongly applying the Act, 2026, an alien to such proceedings, wherein, the Act 2026 (came into force on 11.5.2026) whereas, the marriage solemnized on 18.4.2026.

That, Mst. Kiran Shaheen had categorically stating that she is sui juris and contracted marriage with her own free-will, before learned Magistrate on 30.4.2026 and maintained that no one has abducted her.

بیان کیا کہ میں وے اپىی، سال81/81 ً بعمر تقریبا، زوجہ شیراز،بیان ازاں کرن شاہیه دختر احمد شیر آزاد مرضی سے شیراز کے ساتھ وکاح کیا ہے۔ مجھے کسی وے اغواء وہیں کیا۔ میرے اغواء کی بابت وي جھوٹا ہے۔ سه کر درست تسلیم کیا۔۔،جو مقدمہ درج کیا گیا ہے Furthermore, she also made statement on 11.05.2026 but on 20.05.2026 she was sent to detention without her will for an indefinite period in Shelter home. This Court has not lost its sight over the penal provision of section 342 P.P.C that even if a lawful guardian confines

WP No.40818/2026 5

a person except otherwise expressly provided by law prima facie, be guilty of an offence punishable under the Pakistan Penal Code therefore, even the custody be handed over to a legal guardian the same against her consent the said custody to be restored to a person lawful charge of said person. In instant case, the repeated statements made by Mst. Kiran Shaheen to live with her husband and owing to the marriage performed as sui juris and living with her for a considerable period as his wife does not merits to go into the gallows of detention that too for an indefinite period as there finds nothing in the impugned order that till what time she be detained and then when released from the Shelter Home.

In view, of the above, this Court finds that the order dated 20.05.2026 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Khushab, whereby he sent Mst. Kiran Shaheen to Shelter Home, Khushab/Dar ul Aman (wherein she has been kept since passing of impugned order) against her wishes till the alleged disputed claim is resolved i.e. investigation in case FIR No.152/2026 under section 365-B P.P.C. at Police Station Mitha Tiwana District Khushab, has not been passed after proper appraisal of the relevant material and judicious mind, therefore, the same is set aside and instant Criminal Revision is allowed in consequent writ petition is dismissed. Mst. Kiran Shaheen is set at liberty where she wants to live with her own will.

(Khalid Ibn-i-Aziz) Asif* Judge

APPROVED FOR REPORTING

(Khalid Ibn-i-Aziz) Judge Blue Slip Add