The Core Legal Dispute on Parental Responsibility
The Balochistan High Court recently reinforced a fundamental principle of family law: a father’s maintenance responsibility is a core parental duty that cannot be easily voided. The court dismissed a constitutional petition from a father seeking to avoid his financial duty by denying paternity. This ruling underscores the judiciary’s firm stance on protecting child welfare and enforcing legal obligations tied to parental responsibility.
Background and the Child Support Decree
Following a divorce, the mother, Mst. Naseem, obtained a final child support decree from the Family Court in 2004 for her children’s upkeep. Years later, during the enforcement of maintenance, the father, Ali Akbar, suddenly claimed the two minor girls were not his biological children. He petitioned to be discharged from his financial duty, challenging the existing child support decree and igniting a legal battle over parental responsibility.
The Oaths Act Test and Denial of Paternity
In a strategic move for the enforcement of maintenance, the mother filed an application under the Oaths Act. She proposed that if the father swore under oath that the girls were not his, she would withdraw the claim. This test directly confronted his denial of paternity. The father’s subsequent testimony was deemed ambiguous and self-contradictory by the court, which strengthened the case for enforcing the original child support decree and upholding his parental responsibility.
A Father’s Financial Duty and Past Conduct
The court found the father’s actions inconsistent. In a previous case, he had sought custody of the same children whose paternity he now denied. This contradiction severely undermined his claim and highlighted an attempt at avoiding legal obligations. The judges emphasized that a father’s maintenance responsibility is an undeniable financial duty under both Pakistani law and Islamic rights of children, designed to ensure the welfare of minor children.
The Court’s Final Ruling on the Maintenance Decree
The High Court dismissed the petition, finding no legal flaws in the lower courts’ proceedings. The ruling affirmed that the enforcement of maintenance is crucial. The court stated that the definition of maintenance is broad and encompasses more than basic needs; it is a fundamental parental responsibility. The case was deemed an attempt to delay and avoid legal obligations, ultimately harming the welfare of minor children.
Implications for Enforcing Family Court Orders
This judgment sends a clear message about executing a Family Court order. Courts will examine a parent’s entire conduct and prioritize the welfare of minor children over last-minute technicalities. A father’s maintenance responsibility is a cornerstone of parental responsibility, and claims of denied paternity require substantial proof, especially when past actions tell a different story.
For professional assistance with family law, child support decrees, and enforcement of maintenance orders, contact:
Muhammad Amin, Advocate
📞 Phone: 0313-9708019 | 0335-1990495
📧 Email: muhammadaminadvo111@gmail.com