IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Sant Parkash, J.
Sukhjit Kaur - Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab & Ors. – Respondents
Criminal Writ Petition No.4626 of 2020
Decided On : 05-01-2022
Habeas Corpus - Custody of Minor Child - Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 - Section 7, Section 17 - The court discussed the legality of detaining a minor child and emphasized the paramount consideration of the welfare of the child in deciding custody matters. The court highlighted the provisions of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 and emphasized that the welfare of the child is the decisive factor for the claim of custody.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought custody of her minor daughter from the respondent grandparents. The petitioner's husband died under suspicious circumstances, and the respondent grandparents alleged that the petitioner was responsible for his death. The petitioner claimed that the respondent grandparents had no legal authority to detain her daughter and sought the court's intervention.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the custody of the minor child was not illegal and emphasized the paramount consideration of the welfare of the child in deciding custody matters. The court dismissed the petition with liberty for the petitioner to approach an appropriate court under relevant provisions of law seeking the relief claimed.
Issues: The issues involved the legality of detaining a minor child, the welfare of the child, and the disputed questions of facts regarding the petitioner's fitness to be the guardian of the minor.
Ratio Decidendi: The welfare of the child is the decisive factor for the claim of custody. The court must be guided by the sole consideration of the welfare of the minor, and the legal rights of the mother are subject to the provisions of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition with liberty for the petitioner to approach an appropriate court under relevant provisions of law seeking the relief claimed.
JUDGMENT
Sant Parkash, J. - This is a petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus with a roving writ to search/release of Amreen Kaur, aged 5 years (minor daughter of petitioner) from the custody of respondent Nos.4 and 5 i.e. father-in-law and mother-in-law of petitioner.
2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that petitioner and her husband Lakhwinder Singh were blessed with a daughter namely Amreen Kaur, aged 5/6 years. On 27.05.2020, petitioner alongwith her husband, daughter and in-laws had 'kheer' in dinner, whereafter the entire family complained of food poisoning and admitted in Pooja Nursing Home & Hospital, Raman, District Bathinda. Though the family (exceptLakhwinder Singh) was discharged after having treatment but Lakhwinder Singh died on 30.05.2020. Thereafter, in-laws of petitioner got registered an FIR bearing No.74 dated 02.06.2020 under Sections 307, 302 IPC at Police Station, Raman, Bathinda, against her on the allegations that she was responsible for the death of her husband. During investigation, police did not find petitioner's guilt but respondent Nos.4 and 5 forcibly took away her minor daughter.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that respondent Nos.4 and 5 have no legal authority to detain the minor daughter of petitioner. Her minor daughter is just 5/6 years old and she is not maintaining good health. Once the natural guardian i.e. mother of the minor is alive, no other person can claim the custody of minor child. Hence, the petitioner craves for indulgence of this Court to get the custody of her minor daughter from respondent Nos.4 and 5.
4. Learned counsel for the State, on the basis of reply filed on behalf of respondent Nos.l to 3, has submitted that respondent No.4 - Baljit Singh made a statement before Harnek Singh, SI/SHO, Police Station, Raman, wherein he alleged that on 27.05.2020, some poisonous substance was mixed in the rice pudding (kheer) which was consumed by the family members of petitioner - Sukhjinder Kaur @ Sukhjit Kaur with an intention to kill them. Apart from this, when he intended to serve rice pudding to his grand daughter, she refused to eat by saying that her mother had asked her not to eat it. During investigation, Dr. Gurinder Kaur declared cause of death of Lakhwinder Singh due to respiratory failure. During investigation, police found the petitioner innocent and a cancellation report dated 04.01.2021 was approved by the SSP, Bathinda.Learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 and 5, taking the contents of reply filed on their behalf, submitted that Sub divisional Judicial Magistrate, Talwandi Sabo, vide order dated 29.09.2020 rejected the cancellation report and directed the official respondents to investigate the matter further. Learned counsel has further submitted that petitioner used to quarrel with her husband and respondent No.4 for getting transferred land in her name. On 27.05.2020, petitioner served poisonous sweet dish (kheer), as a result of which, Lakhwinder Singh, son of respondent Nos.4 and 5 lost his life in hospital. Respondent Nos.4 and 5 also remained indoor patients at Jindal Multispecialty Hospital, Talwandi Sabo and discharged on 02.06.2020. On the statement of Baljit Singh - respondent No.4, FIR No.74 dated 02.06.2020 under Sections 307, 302 IPC was registered at Police Station, Raman, against the petitioner. Not only this, petitioner herself abandoned her minor daughter and left matrimonial home. Petitioner has no love & affection with her minor daughter. Moreover, there are disputed questions of law and facts which cannot be decided while availing the remedy under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India and can only be decided after due trial by the Guardian Court. The minor child Amreen Kaur, since her birth, is residing with her grand parents in a joint family. Minor Amreen Kaur is not in illegal custody, rather under protection of her grand parents
The welfare of the child is the paramount consideration in deciding custody matters, and the legal rights of the mother are subject to the provisions of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.
The welfare of the minor child is the paramount consideration in custody matters, and the court should prioritize the child's best interest over legal rights of the parties involved.
The welfare of the child is the decisive factor for the claim of custody, and the court should strike a balance between the welfare of the child and the rights of the parents over the child.
The welfare of the minor child is the paramount consideration in custody matters, and the legal rights of the mother are subject to the welfare of the child.
Custody of child – No hard and fast rule can be laid down insofar as maintainability of a habeas corpus petition in matters of custody of a minor child is concerned – As to whether writ court should ....
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.