Court held that the ‘voice of the child’ is central to custody determinations, cannot be treated as mere formality
In a significant ruling underscoring the primacy of a child’s welfare and right to be heard, the Lahore High Court has dismissed a constitutional petition challenging the custody of a 12-year-old girl, affirming that her intelligent preference to live with her maternal grandmother must be respected.
The court held that the ‘voice of the child’ is central to custody determinations and cannot be treated as a mere formality. LHC’s Justice Rasaal Hasan Syed emphasised that under Section 17(3) of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, a child of sufficient maturity has the right to express a preference, which must be meaningfully considered.
Relying on judgments of the superior courts, the LHC ruled that welfare is a living standard encompassing emotional, psychological, and developmental needs—beyond material considerations or parental claims.
During in-court interaction, the child—neatly dressed, confident, and articulate—clearly stated her wish to live with her maternal grandmother, with whom she has lived since birth and feels emotionally secure. The court noted that the child expressed discomfort with her father due to perceived neglect and affirmed her comfort and attachment to the grandmother.
It is worth mentioning that the father had sought custody under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, which was initially granted by the Guardian Judge, Sialkot, on April 11, 2023. However, the District Judge, Sialkot, set aside that order on June 2, 2023, entrusting custody to the maternal grandmother. Both parents have since remarried and have children from their second marriages. The father has five children, while the mother has two.
The LHC examined the record and upheld the appellate order, finding that the decisive factor was the child’s informed preference. Citing the Supreme Court’s judgment in Dr. Muhammad Asif v. Dr. Sana Sattar (C.R.P. No. 458 of 2024), the court reiterated that listening to a child is a constitutional and international obligation, not an aspirational ideal. The participation of the child, the court observed, is fundamental to a justice system that respects dignity.
While maintaining custody with the maternal grandmother—who was present in the court and found to be alert, healthy, and devoted—the court directed that the father must pay regular maintenance. It also ordered the concerned court to immediately enforce and finalise a workable visitation schedule, ensuring the child’s welfare remains paramount.
The court noted that entrusting custody of minor girls to maternal grandmothers during sensitive developmental years is well-recognised in law, citing multiple precedents where such arrangements were upheld in the best interest of the child.
Concluding that the District Judge’s order protects the welfare of the minor and faithfully honours the child’s voice, the LHC dismissed the petition.
