Biological father responsible for financially supporting a child: LHC

#Biological #father #responsible #financially #supporting #child #LHC

LAHORE: The Lahore High Court (LHC) has ruled that once the patronage is confirmed by maternity methods, a biological father must financially support a marriage child or result in sexual abuse.

The ruler states that under the law of land, once the maternity is confirmed, the child’s financial responsibility cannot be denied by the biological father.

A written decision of this effect was issued in a case related to the financial rehabilitation of a minor girl, whose mother accused Mohammad Afzal of abusing her in 2020, which led to her pregnancy and daughter.

The first information report (FIR) was filed against Afzal under section 376 (rape) and 109 (Abbott) of the Pakistan Code of Conduct.

Later, the mother filed a lawsuit with the court in the court demanding financial rehabilitation (children’s help), and claimed that Afzal was the biological father of the girl, whom the accused rejected, denied the maternity and refused to provide assistance.

A trial court ruled in favor of the child, in which the rapist was ordered to pay Rs 3,000 per month in restoration. However, Afzal challenged the decision in the LHC, which resulted in the latest decisions.

LHC’s Justice Ahmed Nadeem Irshad wrote in his judgment: “As a result, a remand has been remanded to the trial court learning the matter, in which the evidence of the plaintiff has been recorded about the specific claim given in the plaintiff that the petitioner/defendant is the respondent number 2 …”

He added, “If, after recording the evidence, the court concludes that if the minor is really a biological child of the defendant, the action may continue for the rehabilitation allowance.”

However, the decision made it clear that the burden of proving maternity is on the mother.

“In this case where a woman claims to take care of her child against the defendant/biological father, who denies this version, this woman will first need to be established through reliable evidence, that the defendant is really the biological father of the child.

“The burden of proving that the defendant is the biological father of the child, is on the woman who claims to take care.”

The High Court also pointed to Islamic legal principles, citing a historical view on the restoration of children.

It states: “In view of the aforementioned conversation, equity, fair sports and justice requirements, the respondent number 2, if the applicant’s biological child proves to be, he will have to pay and take care of it.

“This person, after giving birth to a child, is obliged to provide care. The biological father is also morally responsible for maintaining his illicit child.”

The court also sent the matter back to the trial court in its judgment, and directed it to set up a pattern before implementing care payments.

“Once a maternity is established, the defendant will be legally obliged to provide child care. The court will evaluate the financial capacity of the defendant and review the child’s needs to determine the appropriate rehabilitation allowance.”

The decision added: “… [trial] The court has made a mistake in the law by taking care of the child without ensuring the proper action of the evidence, that the child is really a biological offspring of the applicant.

“In cases where the maternity is controversial, it is important for the court to first establish biological relations between the children and the defendant, beyond any reasonable doubt.

“Without recording enough evidence, premature rehabilitation is approved by the court’s decision. This failure disrupts the principles of justice and appropriate action in the proceedings of the family law.