LAHORE: The Lahore High Court has directed the provincial government to operationalise within three months the Punjab Legal Aid Agency, which is supposed to provide legal services to indigent persons, especially the women, in family matters.

A full bench passed the order, deciding a set of petitions against section 14 of the Family Courts Act, 1964, which does not allow an appeal against a decree for maintenance to a child of an amount of Rs5000 or less per month.

During the hearing of the petitions, the bench learnt that the province of the Punjab, through Act No.XIX of 2018, enacted the Punjab Legal Aid Act, 2018, which provides for Punjab Legal Aid Agency to be established by the government to provide legal services to an indigent person, inter alia, in family disputes relating to divorce, maintenance, dowry, dower or custody of children.

However, the said agency has not been operationalized till date.

Justice Raheel Kamran Sheikh, who authored the verdict, observed that the adjudication of claims entails physical and psychological toil, incurring of financial resources and a degree of perseverance to succeed for the enforcement of one’s rights.

The judge noted that it is quite an ordeal for a resource-less wife and/or child to invoke jurisdiction of the family court to claim maintenance when a husband/father fails to perform his obligation in that regard, particularly in the absence of a well-established legal aid system.

To ensure effective enforcement of the rights of access to justice and fair trial, as guaranteed under Article 9 and 10A of the Constitution to women and children, the bench directed the government to operationalise the Punjab Legal Aid Agency within a period of three months to provide legal aid services to indigent persons in the family matters.

About the questions posed in the petitions, the bench declared that in terms of section 14(2)(c) of the Act, a decree for maintenance granted for an amount less than Rs5,000 per month to each of the plaintiffs is not appealable.

The bench maintained that Article 10A of the Constitution guarantees right to fair trial and due process for the determination of civil rights and obligations of a person, however, there is nothing in the language of the said article that guarantees at least one right of appeal against all such determinations.

Therefore, the bench said the impugned section 14 is not repugnant to the article 10 of the Constitution.

The bench refrained from deciding a question whether the impugned section 14 is against the injunctions of Islam, saying it is the jurisdiction of the Federal Shariat Court.

Chief Justice Muhammad Ameer Bhatti headed the bench while Justice Masud Abid Naqvi was also its member.

Published in Dawn, February 18th, 2024

Opinion

Merging for what?

Merging for what?

The concern is that if the government is thinking of cutting costs through the merger, we might even lose the functionality levels we currently have.

Editorial

Dubai properties
Updated 16 May, 2024

Dubai properties

It is hoped that any investigation that is conducted will be fair and that no wrongdoing will be excused.
In good faith
16 May, 2024

In good faith

THE ‘P’ in PTI might as well stand for perplexing. After a constant yo-yoing around holding talks, the PTI has...
CTDs’ shortcomings
16 May, 2024

CTDs’ shortcomings

WHILE threats from terrorist groups need to be countered on the battlefield through military means, long-term ...
Reserved seats
Updated 15 May, 2024

Reserved seats

The ECP's decisions and actions clearly need to be reviewed in light of the country’s laws.
Secretive state
15 May, 2024

Secretive state

THERE is a fresh push by the state to stamp out all criticism by using the alibi of protecting national interests....
Plague of rape
15 May, 2024

Plague of rape

FLAWED narratives about women — from being weak and vulnerable to provocative and culpable — have led to...