Child Maintenance Rights Protected as Lahore High Court Rejects Financial Hardship Defense

The Lahore High Court has reinforced Child Maintenance Rights through a significant ruling. The court stated that a father must provide financial support to his minor child, even when facing economic difficulties. Therefore, financial hardship cannot serve as a legal excuse to avoid this responsibility. The judgment emphasized that child maintenance is a continuing duty under the law. In addition, the court said this obligation reflects moral and religious values. The ruling provides stronger protection for children who depend on financial support from their parents. It also highlights the importance of safeguarding the welfare and future of minor children in Pakistan.

Court Upholds Ongoing Responsibility

Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani issued the detailed 15-page judgment. He explained that a father carries a continuous duty to support his minor child. According to the court, no financial challenge can remove that obligation. Furthermore, the court described maintenance as both a legal and ethical responsibility.
The judgment stated that unpaid maintenance remains recoverable. As a result, fathers must clear outstanding dues even after many years. The court also clarified that these financial obligations do not expire with time. Moreover, it cited Surah Al-Baqarah, Surah At-Talaq, and teachings from the Sunnah to support its conclusions. Through these references, the court underlined the importance of protecting children’s rights.

Private Agreements Cannot Override Rights

The case involved Naseer Akhtar Awan, who was living with a disability when a settlement agreement was reached. However, the court ruled that no private arrangement could waive his maintenance rights. Therefore, any agreement limiting a minor child’s entitlement lacks legal standing.
The Lahore High Court upheld earlier decisions by the family court and appellate court. Consequently, it dismissed the father’s petition. Akhtar Hussain Awan argued that a 2005 settlement had settled maintenance matters permanently. He also claimed that older dues could not be recovered. However, the court rejected those arguments and reaffirmed legal protections for children. In addition, it recommended new legislation on recovering past maintenance and sent the judgment to relevant authorities for review.