' By this order the writ petition brought under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 filed by Muhammad Abrar son of Dil Muhammad, Caste Arain, resident of G51-INY, Cess Nock, 14 Percy Street, Glassgow U.K. Through Muhammad Iftikhar son of Dil Muhammad, resident of 178/G.B., Tehsil Gojra, District Toba Tek Singh, petitioner, against the judgment passed by the learned Judge, Family Court at Toba Tek Singh, dated 19-3-2003 is being disposed of whereby the suit for dissolution of marriage filed by respondent No,2 was decreed and the suit for restitution of conjugal rights filed by the petitioner was dismissed.
2. Some relevant facts for disposal of this writ petition are that Mst. Aansa Yasmin respondeth was married with the petitioner on 7-2-2001. Muhammad Ibrar Hussain petitioner was permanently residing in U.K. The marriage was performed with this agreement that Ibrar Hussain petitioner/defendant will carry Mst. Aansa Yasmin, respondent/plaintiff to U.K. But he failed in this connection. Moreover, as and when Muhammad Abrar Hussain came back from U.K. They remained together as husband and wife but there was allegation of cruelty against the petitioner including the use of wine. Consequently the suit for dissolution of marriage was filed on 6-7-2002.
On the other hand Muhammad Ibrar Hussain petitioner filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights and he also filed the written statement wherein the allegations as levelled in the plaint were denied. Keeping in view the pleadings of the parties all relevant issues were framed. Evidence of the parties was recorded. While concluding this case, the learned ,fudge found that since the husband failed to carry his wife to U.K., therefore, the relation between the parties became strained due to this reason, and now the wife is not ready to live with her husband in any case. Even otherwise, the respondent himself did not come forward to rebut the allegations levelled by the wife. Therefore, she is entitled for dissolution of marriage on the ground of Khula' , subject to waiver of her right of maintenance. Consequently Issue No,2 was decided against the petitioner/defendant and on basis of findings over this issue, Issue No,5 was also decided against the petitioner/defendant. Hence this writ petition.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the copies of the relevant record attached with this petition.
4. While hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on examination of plaint and also the evidence on the record it appears that the marriage performed by the petitioner/defendant in U.K.
Is an admitted fact. Learned counsel for the petitioner explained that since the petitioner had to go to U.K., therefore, he performed paper marriage which is fake and only for the sake of residing there.
The point for examination is as to what is the conduct of the petitioner in the affair of his marriage.
It is obvious that the performance of paper marriage in a foreign country and the marriage with a lady in Pakistan is an act of cheating on the part of the husband. It is the thinking of husband that he is treating his marriage in U.K. As paper marriage but it is best known to God as to what is the thinking of the foreign lady that as to whether she is treating the marriage as treated by the petitioner or she is actually treating herself as wife of the petitioner. On the contrary this act on the part of the husband may be treated as an act of cheating by the lady belonging to Pakistan though it is not necessary to mention here that as to why the parents throw their daughters in fire despite knowing that there are chances of cheating on the part of the parents of the bridegroom but it may be mentioned here that the parents are cheated with the hope of better career for their daughters and do not prefer to search suitable kinship in their own country and this hope some times involved the innocent girls in crime. Anyhow, admittedly the performance of a paper marriage and the performance of marriage somewhere else is an act of cheating which is sufficient for the satisfaction of judicious conscious of the Court and in this way the learned Judge, Family Court is fully competent to dissolve the marriage on the basis of Khula' . The evidence on the record shows that it is not a case of misreading and non-reading and that the observations of the learned trial Court over issues Nos.2 and 5 are finding of fact which being in accordance with law and evidence call for no interference.
5. In these circumstances the judgment passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, dated 19-3- 2003 is upheld and this petition being without merits is hereby dismissed.