1. ' The grievance of the petitioner through the instant Constitutional petition was that respondents Nos.1 to 3 be directed to produce Sidra, minor daughter of the petitioner from the custody of Muhammad Sarwar, respondent No,4 and be handed over to the petitioner.
2. ' The brief facts of the instant case are that the petitioner was wife of Muhammad Sarwar, respondent No,4 and daughter Sidra was born out of the wedlock. Respondent No,4 divorced the petitioner and snatched the minor daughter. The petitioner filed a petition before the learned Guardian Judge, Sargodha for the custody of her minor daughter which was allowed vide order dated 11-6-1998 and respondent No,4 was directed to hand over the custody of the minor within 15 days. Respondent No,4 challenged the order of the learned Guardian Judge before learned District Judge, but his appeal was dismissed vide order dated 11-2-1999 and thereafter, his Writ Petition No,3110 of 1999 also met with the same fate on 7-8-2001 and respondent No,4 was directed to part with the custody of the minor unto the petitioner/respondent in adherence to the impugned judgment.
3. ' The learned Guardian Judge directed the S.H.O./respondent No,3 to recover the minor till 26-3- 1999. Thereafter, on 28-5-1999 notice was issued through S.S.P., Sargodha but despite this fact the minor was not recovered. On which the petitioner approached this Court through the instant Constitutional petition for recovery of the minor. This Court ordered to issue a bailiff on 8-1-2002.
4. The bailiff reported that Mst. Rukayya mother of respondent No,4 was available and undertook to produce the minor before this Court on the date fixed which was 5-8-2002, but minor was not produced, on which, S S.P., Sargodha was directed to produce the minor before this Court on 9-8- 2002. On the said date the order was again not complied with and the matter was adjourned to 20-8-2002 and this Court again directed S.S.P., Sargodha and S.H.O., Sillanwali, respondents Nos.2 and 3 to produce the minor on 26-8-2002. On the said date S.S.P. And S.H.O. Both appeared and stated that maximum efforts had been made to recover the minor but the whereabouts of respondent No,4 were unknown and the case was adjourned to 1-10-2002 with the direction to the police officials for effecting the recovery of the minor and again on the said date the position was the same. On which S.S.P., Sargodha and S.H.O., Sillanwali were directed to appear and explain before this Court as to why the order has not been complied with on 18-10-2002. On the said date, S.H.O. Sought one more chance for compliance of the order and the matter was adjourned to 25- 10-2002 when Zafar Iqbal Qureshi, S.S.P., Sargodha and Qaiser Elahi, S.H.O. Were present and they stated that efforts are being made to recover the minor and to cause the arrest of Muhammad Sarwar and stated that he might have gone to Karachi and the time was sought and the case was adjourned for today.
5. ' Today Ijaz Hussain, DSP, Sillanwali and Nazir, S.H.O. Are present with Muhammad Sarwar, respondent No,4 and minor Sidra.
6. ' Respondent No,4 has explained that the minor was handed over to the petitioner in compliance of the order of the learned Guardian Judge, but on the very next day the petitioner on her own, gave the custody of the minor to him due to intervention of the respectables, but he has failed to substantiate this plea. He has produced minor Sidra and according to him she is aged 13 years and she also does not want to accompany the present petitioner and the petitioner states that minor is under pressure and has been tutored.
7. ' Be that as it may, as the minor has been produced in compliance of the previous orders, she is handed over to the petitioner and respondent No,4 has been issued notice as to why he be not convicted and sentenced for committing contempt of Court by flouting the order of the Courts. He has placed himself at the mercy of the Court and states that he is poor man and was not in knowledge of the pendency of the instant petition and had gone to Karachi and produced the minor on its own, therefore, he be pardoned.
8. ' This explanation is not sufficient as he has intentionally and deliberately flouted the orders of the Courts, therefore, I find him guilty for committing contempt of Court, so he is convicted under Article 204 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 and sentenced to three months'
9. R.I. And a fine of Rs,5,000, in non-payment of the fine he will have to further undergo one month's S.- I. If the fine is realized, half of the amount be paid to the petitioner. However, it is observed that respondent No,4 may approach the learned Guardian Judge for custody of the minor as according to him Sidra is now aged 13 years and has attained the majority, therefore, if that course is resorted to, learned Guardian Judge will proceed with the matter in accordance with law uninfluenced by any observation made by this Court. Disposed of.