Lahore High Court overturns restrictions on mother’s movement with child
The Lahore High Court in Pakistan has overturned conditions requiring the mother of a one-year-old child to provide a surety bond of 700,000 rupees with a local guarantor and barring her from taking the child outside the court’s territorial jurisdiction. The court concluded that these restrictions had no legal basis under the provision through which the woman was granted custody of the child.
As Dawn reports, Justice Asad Ali Bajwa noted that after the child was placed in the custody of the mother, whom the court had found to be a suitable person for this, the court could not use Section 491 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to restrict her liberty or freedom of movement.
Lower court’s conditions
On August 10, 2026, an additional district and sessions judge in Sheikhupura returned the child to her biological mother, Misbah Bibi. At the same time, the judge required her to provide a surety bond with a local guarantor and prohibited her from taking the child outside the court’s territorial jurisdiction, except when medical assistance was needed.
Misbah Bibi lived with her parents in Hafizabad district. Her lawyer stated that the imposed conditions exceeded the court’s powers under Section 491 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The child’s father objected to the mother’s application, calling the restrictions lawful, and also questioned the High Court’s ability to hear her petition.
More current news is available on the UA.News Telegram channel Telegram.
Limits of custody powers
Justice Bajwa explained that Section 491 is protective and restorative in nature. It is intended for the prompt release of a person from allegedly unlawful or improper detention and for determining temporary custody in urgent cases.
According to the judge, the sessions court had not established any circumstances indicating that the mother might obstruct the jurisdiction of the proper custody court. The mere assumption that the child might be taken away, he said, could not justify an indefinite restriction of the mother’s and child’s constitutional rights to liberty and movement.
Matters of permanent or long-term custody and possible restrictions on a parent’s movement with a child fall within the jurisdiction of the guardianship court under the Guardians and Wards Act of 1890. The High Court granted Misbah Bibi’s petition and set aside the challenged conditions.
