The paramount consideration of the welfare of the child in deciding custody matters, overriding foreign court orders and legal guardianship provisions.

P.K. Misra, J. This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed on behalf of Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian by his father, who is the attested power of attorney holder. First respondent is the wife of Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian. Respondents 2 and 3 are police officials.

2. Prayer is for a direction to the respondents to secure the daughter of Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian and Respondent No.1. The marriage between Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian and Respondent No.1 took place in India on 7. 1999. Thereafter the couple lived in United States of America. The daughter was born on 23. 2004. Respondent No.1 has filed a petition for divorce in the year 2006 in the court of Pennsylvania in United States of America. Respondent No.1 has also filed a custody petition for the custody of the daughter. Even after filing of such proceedings for divorce, the husband and wife were residing in the same house. On 11. 2007 the husband found that his wife - Respondent No.1 and the daughter -the alleged detenu, were absent. It has been stated:-

"7. I state that the 1st respondent must have brought the child to India by forging my sons signature in a letter as if my son gave his permission to take the child to India."

On 11. 2007, the husband approached the Court of Common Pleas, Chester County, Pennsylavania for securing the custody of the child. The relevant portion of the order passed by such court is extracted hereunder :-

"... 1. Until further order of Court, Father shall have SOLE LEGAL CUSTODY of NIKHITA RAMAKRISHNAN and Father shall have TEMPORARY SOLE PHYSICAL CUSTODY of the child.

2. Mother shall immediately return the child, and the childs United States passport, to Fathers physical custody, or cause the child and the childs passport to be returned to Fathers physical custody...."

According to the petitioners case, in view of the order passed by the Court in U.S.A., the action of Respondent No.1 in keeping the child with herself in Madras (Chennai) is in contravention of the order passed by the American Court and amounts to illegal detention of the child against the courts order and, therefore, the child should be secured and handed over so that she can be taken to United States of America to be handed over to the husband. In the Habeas Corpus Petition it has been stated that the child was ill-treated by the first respondent while at United States of America by beating the child and forcing the child to remain outside the home without adequate clothing. It is further alleged that during the last visit of the first respondent with the child to India, the child had suffered serious urinary infection because of the negligence of the mother. It has been further stated in the petition that after coming to India, Respondent No.1 with a view to harass the parents of the husband, has preferred baseless and illegal complaint alleging commission of offence under the Dowry Prohibition Act at "All Women Police Station, Mylapore". It has been further stated that the deponent has lodged a complaint before the police on 11. 2007, but no action was taken. Further complaint was filed on 21. 2007 for recovery of the child from the illegal custody, but the third respondent refused to receive the same and subsequently such complaint was sent by registered post. On the basis of such allegations, the Habeas Corpus Petition, which was sworn to by the father of the petitioner-husband, was filed on 21. 2007. Along with the petition, copy of the temporary custody order and copies of some other documents have been filed. A power of attorney executed by the petitioner in favour of his father authorising him to take action is filed.

3. After service of notice, Respondent No.1 has entered appearance and filed a counter affidavit. Marriage of the parties in India and subsequent birth of the child in United States of America is admitted. It is, however, stated in the counter that her husband had subjected her to extreme harassment and cruelty as a result of which she w