IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
K. SREEDHAR RAO,L. NARAYANA SWAMY
Dr. B.N. Krishna Prasad - Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka - Respondents
Writ Petition (HC) No.89 of 2008
Decided On : 07/03/2008
HINDU MINORITY & GUARDIANSHIP ACT, 1956 - Sections 6 & 13: [K. Sreedhar Rao & L. Narayana Swamy,JJ] Custody of child - Held, It is a family dispute. Custody of child with one of the parents per se cannot be said to be. Illegal. A Writ of Habeas Corpus is not maintainable.
(W.P. (HC) Filed U/A 226 & 227 of the constitution of India praying to issue a direction to the respondents 1 to 4 to cause production of the daughter of the petitioner Kumar Aditi, now aged about 13 years before this Hon’ble Court from the custody of the R.4)
The petitioner and Respondent No.4 are husband and wife. The petitioner married R-4 in the year 1994. Out of the wedlock they have a child aged about 13 years. It is the contention of the petitioner that the R-4 has taken custody of the child and she has gone abroad. The petitioner states that the respondent has illegally deserted him and therefore she is not entitled to the custody of the child. Hence seeks indulgence of the court by a writ of Habeas Corpus.
2. Thefacts evidently disclose that it is a family dispute. The custody of the child with any one of the parents cannot be termed as per se illegal or unlawful custody. The question would be only to find out which of the parent has got better claim for the custody of the child. In deciding so, the welfare of the child shall be of paramount importance. All these questions cannot be gone into in a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The dispute in question can be gone into by the competent civil court. In that view, the petition is dismissed in limine.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.