Back
CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH and KHATIM REZA, JJ.
Cr. WJC No.949 of 2022
(1.12.2022)
Sarswati Devi & Anr. ... Petitioners
vs.
State of Bihar & Ors. ... Respondents
Constitution of India – Article 226 – Habeas Corpus Petition seeking release from Short Stay Home – Girl inmate has been found to be a minor, based on entries made in School Register and Aadhaar Card – Finding by Special Court that inmate is a minor is also not under challenge and cannot normally be challenged in present proceeding under Article 226 – Petitioners do not have any right to claim custody of inmate – Application dismissed.(Paras 2, 4, 5 and 6)
Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J. – The petitioners claim to be the Uncle and Aunt of ‘X’ (name concealed) and have filed the present writ application seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of writ of habeas corpus for release of ‘X’ in their favor, who has been sent to short stay home (vYikokl) under an order passed by a Special Judge, POCSO, dated 18.05.2022. From the order dated 18.05.2022, it appears that ‘X’ has been found to be a minor, based on the entries made in the school register and Aadhaar Card.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, on the other hand, has submitted that ‘X’ is major, above 18 years of age, as has been found by the Doctor. He submits that ‘X’ has declined to go under the guardianship of her parents. He further contends that she has married the nephew of these petitioners. A statement to this effect ‘X’ has made in her statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, he contends.
3. Learned counsel representing the State, on the other hand, has relied on a Full Bench decision of this Court in case of Shikha Kumari vs. The State of Bihar (Full Bench), reported in 2020(2) PLJR 15
[: 2020 (2) BLJ 544], to contend that when the detention/stay is based on a judicial order passed by a competent court, a writ of habeas corpus for production of such person under detention/stay is not maintainable.
4. Indisputably, the order passed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO, dated 18.05.2022 has not been challenged. The finding by the Special Court that ‘X’ is a minor is also not under challenge and cannot normally be challenged in the present proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Further, the petitioners, in any event, do not have any right to claim custody of ‘X’.
5. In our opinion, this writ application is misconceived and deserves to be dismissed.
6. This application is accordingly dismissed.
A writ of habeas corpus for production of a person under detention/stay based on a judicial order passed by a competent court is not maintainable.
Custody of a minor child by relatives after a parent's death does not constitute illegal detention, and custody disputes should be addressed through appropriate legal proceedings.
The welfare of the child is the supreme consideration in custody matters, and habeas corpus proceedings are not the appropriate forum for resolving custody disputes that require detailed factual inqu....
The court ruled that visitation rights cannot be claimed through habeas corpus when custody is lawful and family court proceedings are ongoing.
Petition for production and custody of minor child – Once complexities is perceived, Writ Court should not usurp powers of Civil Court to decide and proper course to be adopted in this regard is to r....
The High Court retains discretion to grant habeas corpus for custody, yet it cannot disrupt prior lawful custody orders, emphasizing child welfare as paramount.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
