Welfare of the child is paramount in custody matters; habeas corpus petitions should not displace detailed inquiry under family law provisions concerning guardianship.

JUDGMENT :

1. This habeas corpus petition has been filed seeking custody of the master ‘M.’, petitioner’s son.

2. Learned Government Advocate cum Additional Advocate General has submitted the status report dated 09.02.2026 furnished by SHO, Police Station Hindaun City, District Karauli.

3. The relevant facts in brief are that the petitioner married the respondent No. 6, Shri Shubham Jaimini on 18.02.2018 and master ‘M.’ was born on 24.10.2019. The petitioner as well as the respondent No. 6 are Government officers.

4. As per the petitioner’s case, in the year 2025, when both of them were posted in Udaipur where master ‘M.’ was also studying, the respondent No. 6 obtained Transfer Certificate from the school without information to her and took him illegally to Sawai Madhopur to his grandparents house. It is averred in the petition that upon protest by her, she was allowed to converse with master ‘M.’ on mobile on few occasions. It is alleged that she received a call from master ‘M.’ from his tuition teacher’s phone begging her to take him along. It is alleged that she apprehends that her son is not being taken care of properly. It is also averred that on 09.11.2025, she filed a complaint with the SHO, Police Station, Kotwali, Hindaun City, District Karauli alleging forcible detention of master ‘M.’ by his father as also by his grandparents.

5. In the aforesaid factual backdrop, it is prayed that the habeas corpus petition be allowed and custody of master ‘M.’ be handed over to the petitioner.

6. Per contra, the respondents No. 4 and 5 as also the respondent No. 6 have, in their separate reply, denying the allegations levelled in the petition, stated that master ‘M.’ is residing with them since 15.05.2025 with consent of the petitioner and on 12.07.2025, she herself has sent a copy of the transfer certificate to the respondent No. 6 based whereupon, he was admitted to Shalom English Secondary School, Sawai Madhopur on 16.07.2025. A copy of the screenshot of the WhatsApp message of the Transfer Certificate is enclosed with as Annexure- R/3. It is also averred that on 06.10.2025, she has lodged a complaint in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hindaun City against them under Sections 85, 316(2), 115(2) and 126(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 which does not contain any allegation/averment of illegal detention of master ‘M.’. It is averred that they have already filed a petition under Section 6, 8 and 13 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1956’) in the learned Family Court, Sawai Madhopur seeking a declaration that the respondent No. 6 is natural guardian and is entitled to retain custody of master ‘M.’, wherein, notices were issued on 04.11.2025 which is pending consideration. It is, therefore, prayed that the petition be dismissed.

7.In rejoinder, it is stated that the respondent No. 4- father of the respondent No. 6 has executed the partition deed dated 24.06.2025 stating therein that he has ousted his son from his property alleging that he did not care his parents.

8. Reiterating the averments made in the habeas corpus petition, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she was having custody of master ‘M.’ since the time of his birth till July, 2025 when he was forcibly taken away by his father to the place of residence of his grandparents. He contends that the Transfer Certificate was obtained by the father despite her protest.

9. Inviting attention of this Court towards the partition deed dated 24.06.2025, learned counsel also contends that since, the respondent No. 6 has been ousted from the property rights by his father, custody of master ‘M.’ with the grandparents is rendered illegal. He, the