Runaway Afghan couple: Hearing adjourned again for want of record

CJ Khan had taken notice of threats allegedly delivered to the couple from Rehman’s family.


Umer Farooq September 25, 2012

PESHAWAR:


A Peshawar family court was unable to decide on an application requesting DNA testing of an Afghan woman and two  girls alleged to be her daughters.


Afghan couple Maryam and Haiwad eloped to Pakistan with two children, Saba and Husna. According to Maryam, the girls are the daughters of her sister, Marzia, who died in 2006.

However, Abdul Rehman, an Afghan national claiming to have been married to  Maryam since 2006, filed an application in the family court seeking DNA tests on Maryam, Saba and Husna to prove that Maryam is actually the mother of both children.

Maryam had already expressed reservations on having the tests conducted in Pakistan, saying she would not accept the results of local laboratory tests.

On Monday, Family Court Judge Kiran Shaukat adjourned the hearing after failing to decide on the application due to lack of case records, especially the original  copy of the marriage contract (nikahnama) allegedly signed between Abdul Rehman and Maryam in 2006.

According to Ejaz Sabi, Rehman’s counsel, the case record is present before Peshawar High Court (PHC) Chief Justice (CJ) Dost Muhammad Khan. However, the records were not delivered to the family court despite several calls.

“We were expecting a decision on the application, however, it did not come due to lack of the case record, which also includes the original marriage contract,” Sabi said, adding that it was important to conduct DNA tests to help decide the case.

CJ Khan had taken notice of threats allegedly delivered to the couple from Rehman’s family. After holding three hearings in the PHC, he issued directions to the family court to quickly close the case by arranging daily hearings.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 25th, 2012.

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