When the case was called for hearing, Mst. Musarrat Parveen petitioner entered appearance alongwith one Muhammad Jamil who was carrying Mst. Naurin Akhtar (child) the alleged detenu.
Muhammad Akram respondent/father of the child, stated that he had divorced his were, the petitioner, before the institution of this petition as she was having illicit relations with Muhammad Jamil, present in the Court. He has shown me the letters written by Mst. Musarat Parveen petitioner/were in proof of her love affairs with Jamil. He has also shown me the photostat copy of an application moved by Muhammad Jamil for U.S.A. Visa in which he has shown Mst. Musarrat Parveen petitioner as his were and Mst. Naurin Akhtar, the detenu child as his daughter.
2. In the aforesaid circumstances the apprehension of respondent/father that the child will be removed from Pakistan does not seem to be baseless. The child was with her father/petitioner at the time of filing of this application. On 22-10-1990 the custody of the child was given to the petitioner/mother temporarily for the purposes of reconciliation, which by now has failed. Mst.
Musarrat Parveen, the petitioner has produced the child in the Court as directed in order, dated 22- 10-1990. In the peculiar circumstances of the case, I do not desire to give any direction in the nature of habeas corpus. The respondent being the father of the child, it cannot be said that the custody of the child with him was unlawful or illegal, so the child will remain with him. The petitioner may approach the learned Guardian Judge for the custody of child, if so advised.