- (1.) BHANWAR Singh, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) MR. V. K. Shahi and MR. Rishad Murtaza, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner does not press this petition so far as the prayer for writ of habeas corpus is concerned nor they claim the custody of the child. However, they have on the humanitarian ground and also on account of natural love and affection of a father with a daughter requested for visitation right of Nazar Mehdi. On the other hand, Mr. Waquar Hussain, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No. 4 has with reference to the averment of the counter-affidavit submitted by her expressed his reservation to the Nazar Mehdi's right to visit the child. His contention is that Nazar Mehdi contracted marriage with opposite party No. 4 by concealing the fact that he was married from before. As a matter of fact, as supplemented by him further, fraud was played upon her by Nazar Mehdi and she became the victim of circumstances. It was under these compelling features that she cohabited with him as a wife and the result was that she delivered a baby girl, presently six years old. A reference has been made to a photograph in which the first wife of Nazar Mehdi is also seen sitting alongwith the opposite party No. 4 and the baby girl. It has been submitted before the Court that the divorce suit has been filed by Naushaba Mehndi and the proceedings are pending. In view of the bitterness which seems to be subsisting between the two parties, it would not be plausible to issue any order regarding custody of the child. However, since a mother is the natural guardian of a baby girl up to the age of puberty. Naushada Mehndi is allowed to retain the child with her. She may, however, allow Nazar Mehdi to visit the child and meet her for a reasonable time, say one or two hours at a place of a relative or a friend which may be mutually agreed upon by the two parties.
(3.) WITH these directions and observations, the petition is finally disposed of. Petition disposed of. .;