Divorce law: LHC to hear again Christian divorce law plea

Detailed judgment was awaited for about three and a half months following a short order 


Rana Tanveer September 16, 2016
Justice Nisar said that petitions not fixed for re-hearing even after the lapse of 90-day period for announcement of reserved judgments would not become invalid. PHOTO: ONLINE

LAHORE: Lahore High Court has decided to fix for re-hearing a petition in which it had allowed Christian couples to seek divorce or file for separation in accordance with British courts’ directives on the matter, The Express Tribune has learnt.

A short order restoring Section 7 of the Christian Divorce Act of 1869 had been issued on May 23 this year after hearings that continued for five months. Instead of releasing the detailed judgment, the court has decided to fix the petition for rehearing.

Speaking to The Express Tribune on Friday, LHC spokesperson Arif Javed Dar said a date hearing of the petition would be fixed by the registrar’s office. He said there were no special reasons for rehearing of the petition. LHC Chief Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, then a puisne judge, had on May 23 issued a short order saying that omission of Section 7 of the Act in 1981, through an ordinance issued by then president General Ziaul Haq was in violation of the Constitution. After the 1981 ordinance, Christian couples could seek divorce or file for separation only if they accused their partners of adultery.

The short order had received mixed reactions from Christian community leaders and rights’ activists.

So far, 27 applications have been filed with the LHC seeking a copy of the detailed judgment. Of these, 25 applicants have sought a copy of the detailed judgment for personal use and two to challenge the ruling in the Supreme Court of Pakistan, an official at the LHC told The Tribune on conditions of anonymity because he is not authorised to speak on the matter.

Ruling on reserved judgments

In a civil appeal filed against a Sindh High Court judgment issued a year and three months after the hearings’ conclusion, SC Justice Mian Saqib Nisar had last year set at 90 days the time duration suitable for high courts to announce reserved judgments. He had said, “90 days’ time should be good and adequate in view of Article 189 of the Constitution for composition of the judgment.”

Justice Nisar said that if judges could not compose and deliver judgments within this time period and had sufficient reasons for the delay, they could set the case for re-hearing, while bringing on record their reasons for doing so. He added, “because of the high status of the judges of the HCs, it is not expected that they shall fix cases for rehearing as a matter of routine. I’m sure that it shall be for genuine reasons, recorded in the order of rehearing.”

Justice Nisar said that petitions not fixed for re-hearing even after the lapse of 90-day period for announcement of reserved judgments would not become invalid. He said 120 days should be the maximum time taken for issuing a judgment. If not considered invalid altogether, a judgment issued after the lapse of 120 days would stand weakened in quality and efficiency, he said. If such judgments were challenged before the SC, the court should take into consideration the inordinate delay in its assessment of the judgment.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 17th, 2016.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ