Providing maintenance to children is father’s responsibility: SC

Court says girls go to schools so the father should provide for them


Our Correspondent December 18, 2021
Supreme Court. PHOTO: EXPRESS/FILE

print-news
ISLAMABAD:

The Supreme Court ruled on Friday that providing maintenance to children was the responsibility of the father, even if the father had no employment.

A three-member bench, headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial, dismissed a petition filed by Ghulam Dastgir, a resident of Bahawalpur, for reducing the child support.

The bench upheld the decisions of the trial court and the high court in the case and ordered the petitioner to pay Rs15,000 per month to each of his two daughters.

During the hearing, Ghulam Dastgir told the court that neither he was educated nor did he do any work, therefore he could not pay Rs15,000 to every child. The court said that he was healthy and should do some work. The petitioner was told that girls went to schools, so the father should provide for them.

Read No more commercial activities on military land, SC told

The petitioner told the court that his former wife wanted to separate him from his mother, adding that he wanted to serve his mother. The court ruled that it was the petitioner’s responsibility to serve his mother, and not his former wife.

The court added that if the wife demands separate living, then it was the husband's responsibility to keep her separate. The court later disposed of the case by ordering the father to pay for the maintenance of the daughters.

COMMENTS (7)

Muhammad Usman Khalid | 1 year ago | Reply Laws are made for the welfare of humanity. If wife tries to kill the husband with the help of mob then what will the law decide about custody of child If she tries to kill husband then what will law decide about her credibility
ANNIE | 2 years ago | Reply QUOTE THE COMPLETE CASE REFERENCE PLEASE SO THAT THE SAME CAN BE USED AS A CITATION
VIEW MORE 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