Name: shifa jalil

Batch: 46
CMS id: 1349-2021
Subject; Muslim personal law
Topic: family ordinance law and family court
act 1964
 MUSLIM FAMILY LAW ORDINANCE OF
1961:

An Ordinance to give effect to certain recommendations of the commission on marriage and

Family Laws. Whereas it is expedient to give effect to certain recommendation of the
commission on Marriage and Family Laws. Now, therefore in pursuance of the proclamation of
the seventh day of October 1958, and in exercise of all powers enabling him in this behalf, the
President is pleased to make and promulgate the following Ordinance:-
1. Short title, extent, application and commencement:
(1) This Ordinance may be called the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961.
(2) It extends to whole of Pakistan, and applies to all Muslim citizens of Pakistan, wherever they
may be.
(3) It shall come into force on such date as the Federal Government may, by notification in the
official Gazette, appoint in this behalf.
2. Definition:
(a) “Arbitration Council” means a body consisting of the Chairman and a representative of each
of the parties to a matter dealt with this Ordinance:
Provided that where any party fails to nominate a representative within the prescribed time, the
body formed without such representative shall be the Arbitration Council.
(b) “Chairman” means the Chairman of the Union Council or a person appointed by the Federal
Government in the Cantonment areas or by the Provincial Government in other areas or by an
Officer authorized in that behalf by any such Government to discharge the functions of
chairman under Ordinance:
Provided that where the Chairman of the Union Council is a non-Muslim, or he himself wishes
to
make an application to the Arbitration Council, or is, owing to illness or any other reason,
unable to discharge the functions of Chairman, the Council shall elect one of its Muslim
members as Chairman for the purposes of this Ordinance.
(c) “Prescribed” means prescribed by rules made under Sch. II.
(d) “Union Council” means the Union Council or the Town or Union Committee constituted
under the Basic Democracies Order, 1959 and having jurisdiction in the matter as prescribed.
(e) “Ward” means a ward within a Union or Town as defined in the aforesaid Order.
3. Ordinance to override other laws, etc.
(1) The provisions of this Ordinance shall have effect notwithstanding any law, custom or
usage, and the registration of Muslim marriages shall take place only in accordance with these
provisions.
(2) For the removal of doubt, it is hereby declared that the provisions of the Arbitration Act,
1940 (X of 1940), the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 (Act V of 1908), and any other law
regulating the procedure of Courts shall not apply to any Arbitration Council.
4. Succession:
In the event of death of any son or daughter of the propositus before the
opening of succession, the children of such son or daughter, if any, living at the time the
succession opens, shall per stripes, receive a share equivalent to the share which such son or
daughter, as the case may be, would have received if alive.
5. Registration of marriage:
(1) Every marriage solemnized under Muslim Law shall be registered in accordance with the
provisions of this Ordinance.
(2) For the purpose of registration of marriage under this Ordinance, the Union Council shall
grant licenses to one or more persons, to be called Nikah Registrars, but in no case shall more
than on Nikah Registrar be licensed for any one Ward.
(3) Every marriage not solemnized by the Nikah Registrar shall, for the purpose of registration
under this Ordinance be reported to him by the person who has solemnized such marriage.
(4). Whoever contravenes the provisions of such-section (3) shall be punishable with simple
imprisonment for a term which may extent to three months, or with fine which may extend to
one thousand rupees, or with both.
(5). The form of Nakahama, the registers to be maintained by Nikah Registrars, the records to
be preserved by Union Councils, the manner in which marriage shall be registered and copies of
Nakahama shall be supplied to parties, and the fees to be charged thereof, shall be such as
may be prescribed.
(6) Any person may, on payment of the prescribed fee, if any, inspect at the office of the Union
Council the record preserved under sub-section (5), or obtain a copy of any entry therein.
6. Polygamy.
(1) No man, during the subsistence of an existing marriage, shall except with the previous
permission in writing of the Arbitration Council, contract another marriage, nor shall any such
marriage contracted without such permission be registered under this Ordinance.
(2) An application for permission under Sub-section (1) shall be submitted to the Chairman in
the prescribed manner together with the prescribed fee, and shall state reasons for the
proposed marriage, and whether the consent of existing wife or wives has been obtained
thereto.
(3) On receipt of the application under Sub-section (3), Chairman shall ask the applicant and his
existing wife or wives each to nominate a representative, and the Arbitration Council so
constituted may, if satisfied that the proposed marriage is necessary and just, grant, subject to
such condition if any, as may be deemed fit, the permission applied for.
(4) In deciding the application the Arbitration Council shall record its reasons for the decision
and any party may, in the prescribed manner, within the prescribed period, and on payment of
the prescribed fee, prefer an application for revision, to the Collector concerned and his
decision
shall be final and shall not be called in question in any Court.
(5) Any man who contracts another marriage without the permission of the Arbitration Council
shall,
(a) pay immediately the entire amount of the dower whether prompt or deferred, due to the
existing wife or wives, which amount, if not so paid, shall be recoverable as arrears of land
revenue; and
(b) on conviction upon complaint be punishable with the simple imprisonment which may
extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees, or with both.
7. Talaq.
(1) Any man who wishes to divorce his wife shall, as soon as may be after the pronouncement
of talaq in any form whatsoever, give the chairman a notice in writing of his having done so,
and shall supply a copy thereof to the wife.
(2) Whoever, contravenes the provisions of sub-section (1) shall be punishable with simple
imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to five
thousand rupees, or with both.
(3) Save as provided in sub-section (5) talaq, unless revoked earlier, expressly or otherwise,
shall not be effective until the expiration of ninety days from day on which notice under sub-
section (1) is delivered to the Chairman.
(4) Within thirty days of the receipt of notice under Sub-section (1), the Chairman shall
constitute an Arbitration Council for the purpose of bringing about a reconciliation between the
parties, and the Arbitration Council shall take all steps necessary to bring about such
reconciliation.
(5) If the wife be pregnant at the time talaq is pronounced, talaq shall not be effective until the
period mentioned in Sub-section (3) or the pregnancy, whichever later, ends.
(6) Nothing shall debar a wife whose marriage has been terminated by talaq effective under his
section from remarrying the same husband, without an intervening marriage with a third
person, unless such termination is for the third time so effective.
8. Dissolution of marriage otherwise than by talaq. Where the right to divorce has been duly
delegated to the wife and she wishes to exercise that right, or where any of the parties to a
marriage wishes to dissolves the marriage otherwise than by talaq the provisions of section 7
shall, mutatis mutandis and so far, as applicable, apply.
9. Maintenance.
(1) If any husband fails to maintain his wife adequately, or where there are more wives than
one, fails to maintain them equitably, the wife, or all or any of the wives, may in addition to
seeking any other legal remedy available apply to the Chairman who shall constitute an
Arbitration Council to determine the matter, and the Arbitration Council may issue a certificate
specifying the amount which shall be paid as maintenance by the husband.
(2) A husband or wife may, in the prescribed manner, within the prescribed period, and on
payment of the prescribed fee, prefer an application for revision of the certificate, to the
Collector concerned and his decision shall be final and shall not be called in question in any
Court.
(3) Any amount payable under Sub-section (1) or, (2) if, not paid in the due time, shall be
recoverable as arrears of land revenue.
PUNJAB AMENDMENT In sub-section (2), the full-stop occurring at the end shall be replaced by
a colon and thereafter the following proviso shall be added, namely:
Provided that the Commissioner of a Division may, on an application made in this behalf and for
reasons to be recorded, transfer an application for revision of the certificate from a Collector to
any other Collector, or to a Director, Local Government, or to an Additional Commissioner in his
Division. [Ord. II of 1975, Section 2].
10. Dower.
Where no details about the mode of payment of dower are specified in the
Nakahama or the marriage contract, the entire amount of the dower shall be presumed to be
payable on demand.
11. Power to make rules.
(1) The Government may make rules to carry into effect the purposes of this Ordinance.

(2) In making rules under this section, such Government, may provide that a breach of any of
the rules shall be punishable with simple imprisonment which may extend to one month, or
with
fine which may extent to two hundred rupees, or with both.
(3) Rules made under this section shall be published in the official Gazette and shall thereupon
have effect as if enacted in this Ordinance.
12. Amendment of child marriage restraint act, 1929 (xix of 1929). Omitted by Ord. 27 of 1981.
13. Amendment of the dissolution of Muslim marriages act, 1939 (viii of 1939). Omitted by
Ord.27 of 1981

CRITICAL POINTS ON MUSLIM FAMILY LAW ORDINANCE

OF 1961
Muslim Family Law Ordinance of 1961 was a significant legal development in Pakistan, aimed at
regulating Muslim family matters, including marriage and divorce. However, it has been subject to
various critical analyses over the years. Here are some key points of critique:

 Gender Inequality: Critics argue that the ordinance, while attempting to provide some legal
protection to women, still perpetuates gender inequality. For example, the "right of divorce"
given to the husband can be seen as an unequal power dynamic that leaves women vulnerable
in marriage.

 Triple Talaq: The ordinance failed to address the issue of triple talaq (instant divorce) effectively.
While it tried to regulate this practice, critics argue that it did not provide adequate protection to
women against arbitrary and instant divorces, which can leave them economically and socially
vulnerable.

 Polygamy: The ordinance allows Muslim men to have up to four wives. Critics view this as a
practice that can lead to the exploitation of women and argue that it should have been more
strictly regulated.

 Ineffective Implementation: Many critics point out that the ordinance, while progressive on
paper, suffers from ineffective implementation and enforcement. This means that women often
face challenges in accessing their legal rights under the ordinance.

 Legal Complexity: The complexity of the legal system, including the coexistence of traditional
Islamic law (Sharia) with modern legal codes, has created confusion and challenges in practice.
Critics argue that this complexity can be detrimental to women seeking justice.

 Need for Reform: The ordinance has been criticized for not keeping pace with the changing
social and legal landscape. Calls for reforms have grown louder to make family laws more
 equitable, especially in light of contemporary understandings of gender equality and human
rights.

 Cultural Norms: The ordinance sometimes fails to address issues rooted in cultural norms that
may be harmful to women. Critics argue that the law should challenge and change these norms
more proactively.

 Lack of Clarity: Some critics find the ordinance to be vague and unclear in its provisions, leading
to legal disputes and confusion in practice.

 Social Stigma: The ordinance has been criticized for not doing enough to combat the social
stigma and discrimination faced by divorced or separated women in Pakistani society. Despite
legal provisions, women often face ostracism and economic hardships.

 Child Custody: Issues related to child custody, particularly when a marriage ends in divorce,
remain complex and contentious. Critics argue that the ordinance does not provide adequate
clarity or safeguards to protect the best interests of the child.

 Misuse of Legal Provisions: Some critics point out that the legal provisions intended to protect
women can be misused by parties with malicious intent, causing harm to innocent individuals.

 Limited Reforms: While the ordinance was a step towards reform, critics argue that it fell short
of addressing all the issues faced by women in Muslim family matters, leaving many vulnerable
to societal and economic injustices.

 Clash with Traditional Interpretations: The ordinance sometimes clashes with traditional
interpretations of Islamic law and cultural norms, creating conflicts and making it difficult for
women to access their legal rights.

 Religious Conservatism: Resistance to progressive family law reforms has been driven by
religious conservatism, making it challenging to bring about the necessary legal changes to
protect women's rights fully.

 Lack of Awareness: Many individuals, particularly in rural and less educated communities, may
not be aware of the legal provisions and their rights under the ordinance, leading to a lack of
access to justice.

 Need for Education and Advocacy: Critics emphasize the need for legal education and advocacy
to empower women to navigate the legal system and assert their rights effectively.

In summary, while the Muslim Family Law Ordinance of 1961 represented a step towards legal reform
and protection of women's rights in Pakistan, it continues to face criticism for its limitations, complex
implementation, and failure to fully address the complex social and cultural dynamics related to family
matters in Pakistan. Calls for comprehensive reforms and greater awareness persist in the quest for
gender justice and equality.

The Family Court Act of 1964:

The Family Court Act of 1964 was a significant legal development in Pakistan aimed at establishing family
courts to adjudicate family disputes and provide a forum for the resolution of family-related matters.
While it brought about important changes in the legal system

Establishment of Family Courts: Government shall establish one or more Family Courts in each District
or at such other place or places as it may deem necessary and appoint a Judge for each of such Court:
Provided that at least one Family Court in each District, shall be presided over by a woman Judge to be
appointed within a period of six months or within such period as the Federal Government may, on the
request of Provincial Government, extend A woman Judge may be appointed for more than one District
and in such cases the woman Judge may sit for the disposal of cases at such place or places in either
District, as the Provincial Government may specify. Government shall, in consultation with the High
Court, appoint as many woman Judges as may be necessary for the purposes of sub-section.

Qualification: According to Section 4 no person shall be appointed as a Judge of a Family Court unless he
is or has been or is qualified to be appointed as a District Judge, an Additional District Judge, a Civil Judge
or [11:32 pm, 17/11/2023] ..: JURISDICTION OF FAMILY COURT

Section 5 states: Subject to the provisions of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, and the
Conciliation Courts Ordinance, 1961, the Family Courts shall have exclusive jurisdiction to entertain, hear
and adjudicate upon matters specified in the Schedule.

matters are within the jurisdiction of the Family Court: According to the Schedule the following matters
are within the jurisdiction of the Family Court

• 1. Dissolution of marriage including Khula.

2. Dower.

3. Maintenance.

4. Restitution of conjugal rights.

5. Custody of children and the visitation rights of parents to meet them.

6. Guardianship.

7. Jactitation of marriage.8. Dowry.

9 The personal property and belongings of a wife and a child living with his mother.

10. Any other matter arising out of the Nakahama.

Section 5 also added in 2002: Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1898 (Act V of 1898), the Family Court shall have jurisdiction to try the offences specified in Part II of the
Schedule, where one of the spouses is victim of an offence committed by the other.

. Conclusion of trial.: After the close of evidence of both sides, the Family Court shall make another
effort to affect a compromise or reconciliation between the parties within a period not exceeding fifteen
days.

If such compromise or reconciliation is not possible, the Family Court shall announce its judgement and
give a decree.

17A. Suit for maintenance:

In a suit for maintenance, the Family Court shall, on the date of the first appearance of the defendant,
fix interim monthly maintenance for wife or a child and if the defendant fails to pay the maintenance by
fourteen days of each month, the defense of the defendant shall stand struck off and the Family Court
shall decree the suit for maintenance on the basis

In a decree for maintenance, the Family Court may:

• (a) fix an amount of maintenance higher than the amount prayed for in the plaint due to afflux of time
or any other relevant circumstances; and

(b) prescribe the annual increase in the maintenance.

If the Family Court does not prescribe the annual increase in the maintenance, the maintenance fixed by
the Court shall automatically stand increased at the rate of ten percent each year.

For purposes of fixing the maintenance, the Family Court may summon the relevant documentary
evidence from any organization, body or authority to determine the estate and resources of the
defendant.]

• 17B. Power of the Court to issue Commission. - Subject to such conditions and limitations as may be
prescribed, the Court may issue a Commission to,

• (a) examine any person;

• (b) make a local investigation; and

(c) inspect any property or document.

. Court fee. - Notwithstanding anything contained in the Court Fees Act, 1870 (VII of 1870), the Court fee
to be paid on any plaint or memorandum of appeal shall be rupees fifteen for any kind of suit or appeal
under this Act.

21B.Intimation to Arbitration; If a Family Court decrees dissolution of a Muslim marriage, the Family
Court shall immediately but not later than three days from the decree send by registered post or other
means a certified copy of the decree to the concerned Chairman of the Arbitration Council and upon
receipt of the decree, the Chairman shall proceed as if he had received intimation of Talag under the
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 (VIII of 1961).]

If in any proceedings before a Family Court it is brought to the notice of the Court that a marriage
solemnized under the Muslim Law after the coming into force of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance,
1961, has not been registered in accordance with the provisions of the said Ordinance and the rules
framed thereunder, the Court shall communicate such fact in writing to the Union Council for the area
where the marriage was solemnized.

Critical points on family court act 1964:

it has also been the subject of various critical analyses. Here are some key points of critique:

 Limited Jurisdiction: Critics argue that the Family Court Act 1964 has limited jurisdiction and
may not cover all family-related disputes comprehensively. Some matters, such as inheritance
and succession, are not within its purview, leaving a gap in the legal framework.

 Overburdened Courts: Over the years, family courts in Pakistan have become heavily burdened
with cases, leading to delays in justice delivery. Critics argue that the act has not adequately
addressed this issue, causing frustrations for litigants.

 Complex Procedures: The legal procedures in family courts can be complex and time-consuming,
particularly for individuals without legal representation. This complexity can hinder access to
justice, especially for vulnerable and less educated parties.

 Inequitable Outcomes: The act's provisions have been criticized for sometimes leading to
inequitable outcomes, particularly in cases of divorce, child custody, and maintenance. Critics
argue that the legal framework does not always ensure fair and just decisions.

 Enforcement Challenges: Some provisions of the act may be difficult to enforce effectively,
particularly in cases of non-compliance with court orders related to maintenance, custody, or
visitation rights.

 Inadequate Mediation and Counseling: While the act emphasizes reconciliation and the role of
mediation in family disputes, critics argue that there is room for improvement in terms of the
effectiveness of mediation and counseling services.

 Gender Bias: Some critics argue that the act's provisions, while meant to be gender-neutral, can
sometimes be implemented in a way that is biased against women, particularly in matters
related to divorce, maintenance, and child custody.
  Socio-Cultural Realities: The act may not always address the socio-cultural realities of the
diverse population in Pakistan. Customary practices and social norms can sometimes clash with
the legal framework, making it challenging to implement the law effectively.

 Access to Legal Aid: The act does not always ensure equal access to legal aid and representation,
which is a critical aspect of ensuring fairness in family disputes. Vulnerable and marginalized
parties may struggle to access legal assistance.

 Lack of Enforcement Mechanisms: Critics argue that the act does not provide adequate
mechanisms for enforcing court orders, particularly in cases where maintenance payments or
custody arrangements are not complied with.

 Access to Justice for Marginalized Groups: Vulnerable and marginalized groups, including
women and children, may face obstacles in accessing justice through the family court system.
The act may not fully address the specific needs and challenges faced by these groups.

 Complex Interplay with Personal Laws: The Family Court Act operates within the framework of
personal laws in Pakistan, which can vary based on religious affiliations. This complex interplay
can lead to legal challenges and ambiguities, impacting the consistency and fairness of legal
outcomes.

 Influence of Traditional Dispute Resolution Mechanisms: In many regions of Pakistan,

traditional dispute resolution mechanisms, such as jirgas and panchayats, coexist with the family
court system. Critics argue that the act does not effectively regulate or address the potential
conflicts between these traditional systems and modern legal processes

 Lack of Public Awareness: Limited public awareness about the provisions and procedures of
family courts can be a significant barrier to accessing justice. Critics stress the need for enhanced
awareness campaigns and legal literacy programs

 Role of Legal Professionals: The act's reliance on legal professionals, including lawyers and
judges, may sometimes lead to a perception of a legal system that is distant from the realities of
everyday families. Critics argue for a more accessible and user-friendly approach to dispute
resolutions.

 Need for Modernization: The act was enacted over five decades ago, and critics contend that it
needs modernization to address contemporary challenges, including issues related to
technology, cyberbullying, and digital evidence in family disputes.

 Uniformity and Consistency: Ensuring uniformity and consistency in family court judgments and
procedures across different regions of Pakistan has been a challenge. Critics emphasize the need
for greater standardization and uniformity in the application of family laws.

In summary, while the Family Court Act of 1964 was a significant legal development in Pakistan's family
justice system, it has faced criticisms related to its jurisdiction, procedural complexities, enforcement
mechanisms, and challenges in ensuring access to justice for marginalized groups. Ongoing efforts are
required to address these issues and enhance the effectiveness of the family court in conclusion, while
the Family Court Act of 1964 in Pakistan was a significant step in providing a dedicated legal framework
for family disputes, it has faced criticism for its limited jurisdiction, procedural complexities, and
challenges in ensuring equitable outcomes. Calls for reforms and improvements in the family court
system continue to address these issues and enhance access to justice for all parties involved in family
dispute Surt system.

JUDGMENT SHEET:
IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, BAHAWALPUR BENCH, BAHAWALPUR. (JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT) CRIMINAL
Muzaffar Nawaz vs Ishrat Rasool and another JUDGMENT DATE OF HEARING: 13.09.2021. APPELLANT BY:
Malik Imtiaz Mahmood Awan, Advocate with petitioner. STATE BY: Mr. Muhammad Latif, Additional
Prosecutor General. RESPONDENT: Hafiz Khaliq Ditta Langah, Advocate

Briefly the facts of the case giving rise to the instant criminal revision are that mist. Ishrat
Rasool/respondent No.1, as first wife of Muzaffar Nawaz accused/ petitioner, filed a private complaint

under section 6 (5)(b) of The Muslim Family Laws

Ordinance, 1961:
Aagainst said Muzaffar Nawaz contending that she contracted marriage with him on 02.09.2013, during
subsistence of that marriage and without getting her permission, Muzaffar Nawaz contracted another
marriage with MS. Sitara Jabeen on 15.04.2015. The said complaint was marked to the Magistrate
Section 30, Rahim Yar Khan, who after recording cursory evidence, summoned the accused, framed the
charge, recorded evidence of respective parties and on conclusion of trial vide judgment dated
17.05.2019 convicted the accused/petitioner under section 6(5)(b) of The Muslim Family Laws
Ordinance, 1961 and 2 sentenced him to simple imprisonment for three months with fine of five
hundred thousand rupees, in case of default in payment of fine, the accused was to further suffer simple
imprisonment for two months. Against his said conviction and sentence, the accused/petitioner filed an
appeal before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rahim Yar Khan, which was dismissed vide
judgment dated 12.09.2019, hence, the instant criminal revision. 2. The main stance of learned counsel
for the petitioner is that the complaint filed by the respondent could only be tried by the Family Court
and not by a Magistrate and here in this case as the complaint was tried by a Magistrate, who had no
jurisdiction in the matter, therefore, the entire proceedings including the trial would stand vitiated. 3. On
the other hand, learned counsel for complainant/ respondent opposed the above arguments and
contended that even if there was some error in the forum of trial, the same stood rectified in appeal
before the learned appellate court. In support of his contentions learned counsel placed reliance on the
case “NASEEM AKHTAR DURRANI versus ABIDA SULTAN and 3 others” (1992 MLD 93), “ISHTIAQ AHMAD
versus THE STATE and others” (PLD 2017 SC 187), “BSHRAT IQBAL versus THE STATE and another” (1993
SCMR 1901)’ “SHAUKAT ALI versus KALSOOM AKHTAR and another” (PLD 1991 Lahore 247) and FAUZIA
HUSSAIN versus Mian KHADIM HUSSAIN” (PLD 1985 Lahore 165). 4. After hearing the arguments of
learned counsel for the parties, the moot point here in this case turns out to be that what would be the
proper forum to try a complaint under section 6(5)(b) of The Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 i.e. a
Judicial Magistrate implicatory or necessarily it be a Judge Family Court who may also enjoy the powers
of a Judicial Magistrate, as required by section 20 of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964
(amended by Family Courts (Amendment) Ordinance 2002)? Crl.Rev.No.168/2019-BWP. 3 Before
proceeding further relevant provisions i.e., Section 5 and Section 20 (as amended by Family Courts
(Amendment) Ordinance 2002) of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964, are reproduced here
under: - S.5. Jurisdiction Subject to the provisions of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, and the
Conciliation Courts Ordinance, 1961, the Family Courts shall have exclusive jurisdiction to entertain, hear
and adjudicate upon matters specified in [Part I of the Schedule.”] Notwithstanding anything contained
in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (Act V of 1898), the Family Court shall have jurisdiction to try
the offences specified in Part II of the Schedule, where one of the spouses is victim of an offence
committed by the other. (3) The High Court may with approval of the Government, amend the schedule
so as to alter, delete or add any entry thereto.”]

Section 20 (as amended by Family Courts (Amendment)

Ordinance 2002) [Section 20. Family Court as Judicial
Magistrate. - (1) A Family Court shall be deemed as the Judicial Magistrate of the first class
under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (V of 1898) for taking cognizance and trial of any offence
under this Act; the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 (VII of 1961), and the Child Marriage Restraint
Act, 1929 (XIX of 1929). (2) A Family Court shall conduct the trial of an offence under subsection (1) in
accordance with the provisions of Chapter XXII of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (V of 1898)
relating to the summary trial. (3) An offence other than contempt of a Family Court shall be cognizable
on the complaint of the Union Council, Arbitration Council or the aggrieved party.] The intention of
legislature reflected from the amendment introduced above is to fold all family affairs under an umbrella
so that sanctity of family affairs and dignity of spouses could be saved from public exposure in ordinary
courts. The word “exclusive” used in Section 5 makes it vividly clear that no other court can assume
jurisdiction in respect of provisions of Muslim Family Laws Ordinance except the 4-court constituted
under the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964; it is further clarified that only family court can assume
jurisdiction in some offences of PPC as mentioned in Part II of the Schedule, if committed against the
spouses. It was the reason that under section 20 Family Court was authorized to act as Magistrate of Its
Class under Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. At this stage, the Court would like to specifically refer sub-
Article (2) of Article 270AA of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, inserted by way of
Eighteenth Amendment Act, X of 2010, which reads as under: - “270AA (2). Except as provided in clause
(1) and subject to the provisions of the Constitution (Eighteenth Amendment) Act, 2010, all other laws
including President’s Order, Acts, Ordinances, Chief Executive’s Orders, regulations, enactments,
notifications, rules, orders or bye-laws made between the twelfth day of October, one thousand nine
hundred and ninety-nine and the thirty-first day of October, two thousand and three (both days
inclusive) and still in force shall, continue to be in force until altered, repealed or amended by the
competent authority.” In the presence of above specific saving clause, this Court has been informed that
Section 5 and 20 (as amended by Family Courts (Amendment) Ordinance 2002 (LV of 2002) has not been
altered, repealed or amended by the competent authority, as such, the same is in vogue and applicable
with all force. Furthermore, Article 175(2) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 in
clear terms provides that: - “No Court shall have any jurisdiction save as is or may be conferred on it by
the Constitution or by or under any law.” Therefore, once it is settled that per force of Section 20 (as
amended by Family Courts (Amendment) Ordinance 2002) of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964,
only the family court had the jurisdiction to try a complaint under section 6(5)(b) of The Muslim Family
Laws Ordinance, 1961; trial conducted by the Magistrate was blatant violation of Article 175(2) of the
Constitution, as reproduced above. Crl.Rev.No.168/2019-BWP. 5 5. As a corollary, the offence under
section 6(5)(b) Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 would only be tried by family court constituted
under West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964. The Magistrate has erroneously assumed the jurisdictionn,
the trial stands vitiated. Consequently, the instant criminal revision is allowed, the judgments of both the
courts below are set-aside and all the proceedings conducted by these courts are quashed.