On 21 October 2026 the Federal Constitutional Court reissued notices in a review plea against its 3 February 2026 judgment (Shahbaz Masih v. Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore & others, F.C.P.L.A. No. 536/2025) upholding the conversion and marriage of Maria Bibi to Shaheryar Ahmad. The Court had held underage marriages are punishable under the Child Marriage Act, 1929 but not void, and that disputed questions of age cannot be decided in habeas corpus proceedings.

On 21 October 2026, the Federal Constitutional Court reissued notices in a review plea against its own 3 February 2026 judgment in Shahbaz Masih v. Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore & others — the case of Maria Bibi's disputed marriage to Shaheryar Ahmad. The ruling held that an underage marriage is punishable under the Child Marriage Act, 1929, but not void. This guide explains the case, the ruling and the pending review. This is general information, not advice for your particular situation.

A note on sources: the case reference — F.C.P.L.A. No. 536/2025, bench of Mr Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi (author) and Mr Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, heard 3 February 2026 — is confirmed from the judgment on the Court's official portal (fccp.gov.pk). Review-plea facts are from press reporting of 21–22 October 2026; the review is pending.

The case behind the ruling

Shahbaz Masih lodged F.I.R. No. 5144/2025 on 30 July 2025 at Nawab Town Police Station, Lahore, alleging the kidnapping of his daughter Maria Bibi. The case was cancelled after Maria recorded a Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement before a Magistrate at Model Town, Lahore, stating she had married Shaheryar Ahmad of her own free will.

The father said Maria was born on 7 October 2012 — twelve years, nine months and twenty days at the alleged marriage — and challenged the Nikahnama, which a Union Council Secretary disowned. His Section 491 Cr.P.C. recovery petition was dismissed on 9 October 2025, his Lahore High Court writ petition (W.P. No. 61396-H/2025), and the Federal Constitutional Court refused leave on 3 February 2026.

What the Court decided

  • A Muslim man may marry a Christian woman. Islamic law permits a Muslim male to marry a Christian woman (Ahl al-Kitab); the Court cited Mulla's Principles of Islamic Law and Marina Jatoi v. Nuruddin K. Jatoi (PLD 1967 SC 580).
  • Conversion has defined prerequisites. As the record showed Maria converted before the nikah, the marriage was treated as one between two Muslims under the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961. A declaration and recitation of the Kalma with belief in the Oneness of Allah, the Finality of the Prophethood and the Holy Quran suffice; an affidavit appended to the Nikahnama and a Dar-ul-Afta Ahl-e-Sunnat certificate were accepted as proof.
  • An underage marriage is punishable — but not void. The Child Marriage Act, 1929 "merely criminalises the solemnisation of a child marriage but does not expressly declare such a marriage to be void or voidable." A legislature intending to override settled personal law must do so in clear and unequivocal terms.
  • Prior precedent was followed. The Court subscribed to Mushtaq Ahmad (PLD 1962 (W.P.) Karachi 442), Mst. Bakhshi (PLD 1970 SC 323) and Mauj Ali (1970 SCMR 437): the 1929 Act punishes those who contract or solemnise a child marriage without voiding it. Valid under Muhammadan law and freely entered, the marriage made the husband the girl's lawful guardian.
  • The FCC is the final forum on constitutional interpretation. All courts, including the Supreme Court, are bound by the FCC's pronouncements; earlier Supreme Court judgments are persuasive, not binding.

The review now before the Court

On 30 May 2026, Shahbaz Masih filed a review petition through Advocate Supreme Court Muhammad Saqib Jillani under Article 175(G). Per press reports, it relies on the Federal Shariat Court's Ali Azhar v. Province of Sindh (PLD 2023 FSC 265), argues Article 203(G) gives the Federal Shariat Court the final say on Shariah questions and that preferring the Section 164 statement over official records was error, and asks the judgment be set aside and Maria Bibi handed to her parents.

At the 21 October 2026 hearing, the bench observed that the original judgment decided an appeal against a habeas corpus order — not the girl's age — and that age objections belong before the family court. Notices were reissued to the married couple and the hearing adjourned. No outcome has been announced.

What the ruling does — and does not — change

  • It does not legalise child marriage. Criminal liability for those who contract or solemnise an underage marriage under the 1929 Act or the newer provincial and federal statutes remains intact.
  • It does not decide Maria's age — the Court found the documents too doubtful to act upon on that forum.
  • It does not clear questions of forged Nikahnamas — those belong to the criminal track, which the Court left unaffected.
  • It fixes the forum for age disputes: the family court or the criminal trial, not summary petitions under Section 491 Cr.P.C., which examine only unlawful detention.

Your practical checklist

  • Dispute a nikah on age grounds before the family court or in the criminal trial, with documents obtained long before the dispute.
  • Register births promptly — the Court expressly discounted certificates issued seven to ten years after the claimed birth date.
  • A Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement carries significant evidentiary value — take legal advice before one is recorded.
  • Have the Nikahnama verified with the concerned Union Council if registration is disputed.
  • Check which child-marriage statute applies in your province, and track the pending review, as the law may still develop.

Frequently asked questions

Does this ruling make child marriage legal in Pakistan?

No. An underage marriage can still be punished under the Child Marriage Act, 1929 or the applicable provincial or federal statute — only, the Act does not automatically render the marriage void.

Can a Muslim man marry a Christian woman in Pakistan?

On the Court's reasoning, yes: Islamic law permits a Muslim male to marry a Christian woman (Ahl al-Kitab). Here the Court treated the marriage as between two Muslims because it accepted her pre-nikah conversion.

Can a court decide the girl's age in a habeas corpus petition?

According to the FCC, no. Habeas corpus and Section 491 Cr.P.C. proceedings test only whether detention is unlawful; age and nikah-validity questions belong to the family court or the criminal trial.

The review is pending — what happens next?

Notices were reissued on 21 October 2026 and the hearing adjourned. Until the review is decided, the 3 February 2026 judgment stands.

Related guides

Need guidance on your situation? Whether a disputed nikah, an age question or a recovery petition, the right forum and evidence make all the difference — and the law here is still developing. Contact us to book a confidential consultation.

Common questions

No. An underage marriage can still be punished under the Child Marriage Act, 1929 or the applicable provincial or federal statute — only, the Act does not automatically render the marriage void.

On the Court's reasoning, yes: Islamic law permits a Muslim male to marry a Christian woman (Ahl al-Kitab). Here the Court treated the marriage as between two Muslims because it accepted her pre-nikah conversion.

According to the FCC, no. Habeas corpus and Section 491 Cr.P.C. proceedings test only whether detention is unlawful; age and nikah-validity questions belong to the family court or the criminal trial.

Notices were reissued on 21 October 2026 and the hearing adjourned. Until the review is decided, the 3 February 2026 judgment stands.

Related guides

Need guidance on your matter? Book a Consultation

This article provides general legal information, not legal advice for your specific matter. Online contact does not create an advocate–client relationship.