IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Manoj Jain, JJ.
Ravish Beniwal - Appellant
Versus
The State NCT of Delhi & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(Cr) 945 of 2024
Decided On : 05-04-2024
Habeas Corpus - Matrimonial Dispute - The court held that the daughter of the petitioner was not in illegal custody of her grandparents and that the issue arose from matrimonial disputes, thus not calling for interference from the court.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought a writ of Habeas Corpus to produce his daughter from the custody of the respondent's grandparents, arising from matrimonial disputes.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the daughter was not in illegal custody and that the issue was related to matrimonial disputes, directing the petitioner to approach the Family Court for custody or visitation rights.
Issues: The issue revolved around the custody of the daughter in the context of matrimonial disputes.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the daughter was not in illegal custody and that the matter should be addressed through the Family Court for custody or visitation rights.
Final Decision: The petition was disposed of, with the petitioner being directed to approach the Family Court for custody or visitation rights.
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. The present petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus directing the respondent Nos.2 & 3 to produce daughter of the petitioner from the custody of respondent Nos.4 & 5.
2. Petitioner got married to respondent No.4 on 31.01.2009 and out of the said wedlock, a baby girl was born. Thereafter, in June, 2018, respondent No.4 and their daughter wilfully left the matrimonial home. The petitioner got to know that on 12.01.2024, the respondent No.4 has absconded with one Himanshu Goyal leaving behind her daughter for which a complaint vide DD No.107 dated 13.01.2024 has been lodged at Police Station Palam Village by respondent No.5 who is father of the wife of the petitioner. The petitioner has no information about whereabouts of his daughter since 16.02.2024. Hence, the present petition has been filed.
3. Pursuant to order dated 21.03.2024, the daughter of petitioner Tarusha along with her grand-father, i.e. respondent No.5, is produced in Court today. Such daughter submits that she was born on 28.02.2024 and presently studying in 10th Standard in Kendriya Vidyalaya at New Delhi. She further submits that in the month of June, 2018, she and her mother left the house of petitioner and thereafter, they have been continuously staying with her grand-parents (nana-nani). She also submitted that her father used to use abusive language against her mother.
4. When this Court specifically asked the daughter of the petitioner with whom she would like to stay, she replied that she wishes to continue stay with her grand-parents (nana-nani).
5. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the wife of the petitioner filed a petitioner under PWDV Act against the petitioner before learned Mahila Court and in the said petition, the petitioner herein filed an application seeking visitation rights. However, such application has been dismissed vide order dated 24.02.2024.
6. Learned counsel for petitioner further submits that the daughter of the petitioner, before leaving the company of the petitioner, was studying in G.D. Goenka School, Rohini, Delhi and now, she is studying in Kendriya Vidyalaya. It is further submitted that mama-mami of the daughter of the petitioner are staying separately from her grand-parents (nana-nani) and moreover, the grand-parents are aged and not able to take proper care of the daughter of the petitioner.
7. Respondent No.5/grand-father (nana) of the daughter of the petitioner is present in Court and submits that he retired from Airport Authority of India as Senior Superintendent on 28.02.2014. He further submits that he has received an amount of Rs.1 crore towards retiral benefits which has been invested by him in property and in Fixed Deposit and apart from this, he has 4 acres of land and sufficient means to take care of his grand-daughter.
8. This petition is for issuance of a writ in the nature of habeas corpus, however, the daughter of the petitioner is not in illegal custody of her grand-parents. The issue in the present petition is arising out of matrimonial disputes. Thus, the present petition does not call for any interference from us.
9. In view of above, the present petition is disposed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to approach Family Court seeking custody or visitation rights of his daughter, as per law.
10. We also direct that any such application seeking visitation or custody of daughter of the petitioner is filed by the petitioner before Family Court, it be decided expeditiously.
11. The writ petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
AI
The court emphasized that the issue of custody in the context of matrimonial disputes should be addressed through the Family Court.
Point of law: Custody of child – Unlawful and illegal custody - A writ of habeas corpus, as has been consistently held, though a writ of right is not to be issued as a matter of course, particularly ....
The court ruled that visitation rights cannot be claimed through habeas corpus when custody is lawful and family court proceedings are ongoing.
The writ of habeas corpus in child custody cases is an extraordinary, discretionary remedy predicated on the child's welfare. While not a substitute for statutory procedures, courts may intervene via....
The best interest and welfare of the child, as well as the principles of the 'tender years rule', are paramount considerations in child custody matters.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the custody of a minor child with the father as the natural guardian cannot be held illegal or unlawful unless it is in breach of some authori....
Point of law: Custody of child - In a child custody matter, a writ of habeas corpus would be entertainable where it is established that the detention of the minor child by the parent or others is ill....
The welfare of the child is the paramount consideration in custody disputes, and habeas corpus is not the appropriate remedy for custody transfer when legal avenues exist.
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.