' Through this petition, the petitioner has challenged the legality, correctness and validity of the order dated 13.3.2014 passed by an Addl. District Judge, Kot Addu, District Muzaffargarh, whereby he was ordered to hand over the interim custody, of two female minors, namely, Shumaila aged 5 and Sitara aged 31/2 to Mst. Zohra Bibi, Respondent No, 3, mother of the minors.
2. As is gleaned from the documents annexed to the writ petition, two applications for the custody and guardianship of the minors were filed. One application was filed by the petitioner on 06.8.2013, while the second application was filed by Mst. Zohra Bibi on 8.11.2013. In both the petitions, Respondent No, 3 and the petitioner traded allegations against each other so as to make out a case as to why the one is to be preferred to the other for the custody of the three minors. However, it is not in dispute that the petitioner has contracted second marriage that turned out to be a bone of contention between Respondent No, 3 and the petitioner. While Respondent No, 3 maintains that she was turned out of the house by the petitioner, the petitioner alleges that she left his house of her own volition. Applications were also moved for the interim custody of the minors. The petitioner maintains that he withdrew his application to the extent of Muhammad Dilawar aged 11/2, but he resisted the efforts of Respondent No, 3 regarding the interim custody of Shumaila and Sitara, the minor females.
3. Learned Judge Family Court/Guardian Court, Kot Addu, District Muzaffargarh handed over the 'custody of Dilawar to his mother, but he dismissed her application concerning the interim custody of the minor girls on the ground that her habeas petition moved before the High Court, remained unsuccessful or was dismissed for non-prosecution, which pointed in the direction. Of her lack of interest in the minors. Nevertheless, on an appeal instituted by Respondent No, 3, the aforesaid order dated 04.2.2014 passed by the learned Judge Family Court/Guardian Court, Kot Addu, District Muzaffargarh was reversed and overturned. The appeal of Respondent No, 3 was allowed by an Addl. District Judge, Kot Addu, District Muzaffargarh vide order dated 13.3.2014, the validity whereof has been questioned by filing the instant writ petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the petitioner has great love and affection for the minors; that Respondent No, 3 has effected a compromise with the petitioner. That is why, Muhammad Dilawar (minor) was handed over to her; that mother of the minors resiled from her undertaking and is now insisting upon the custody of the two other female minors; that the mother of the minors did not evince any interest in their welfare, which is evident from the fact that she did not pursue her petition before the High Court filed under Section 491, Cr.P.C. Which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 12.9.2013. And that the learned Appellate Court passed the order in a perfunctory manner. Above all, the paramount consideration of the welfare of the minors did not factor into the order passed by the learned Appellate Court.
5. I have given patient hearing to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and also gone through the record appended to the writ petition with his assistance.
6. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner has contracted second marriage. Step-mother of the female minors might be a good-natured lady, but unless there are compelling reasons, she need not be tasked with the upbringing of the step-daughters. It is well-established law that the custody of the female children would continue to lie with mother until they attained puberty. Keeping in view the tender ages of the minors and also taking into consideration that the custody of male child aged 11/2 has been willingly given by the petitioner to his mother, it would be far better to deliver the interim custody of female minors to her as well than keeping them separate from their sibling. If all the siblings are brought up together under the same roof, it would not only foster love, affection and understanding among them but it would also be helpful for their mental health, and growth. On the other hand, the petitioner might have children from the second marriage in future, and in that event, it would be difficulty for the step-mother of the C, minors to devote her time and energy to her step-daughters. It has been underscored in the impugned order dated 13.3.2014 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Kot Addu, District; Muzaffargarh and held in scores of judgments handed down by the Superior Courts that in guardianship cases, welfare of a minor would always be a paramount and overriding consideration. Although this principle has been evolved with respect to the final orders of custody, yet there appears to be no plausible reason not to extend it to the decisions of the petitions moved under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.
7. Before parting with this order, attention of the learned Judge Family Court/Guardian Court, Kot Addu District Muzaffargarh is drawn to the provisions of Section 12-A cf the W.P. Family Courts Act, 1964, requiring him to decide the petitions pending before him within six months from the date of their institutions.
8. For what has been stated above, I find no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order dated 13.3.2014 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Kot Addu, District Muzaffargarh. Consequently, this writ petition being devoid of merits is dismissed in limine.