Back
2023 Supreme(P&H) 2624
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ALOK JAIN, J.
Maninder Singh Sekhon – Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab & Anr. – Respondents
CRWP-9905 of 2022 (O&M)
Decided On : 17-07-2023
For the Petitioner:Mr.APS Deol, Sr.Advocate, Mr. Himmat Deol, Advocate; For the Petitioner with petitioner in person.
For the Respondent: Mr. Kamalpreet Bawa, AAG, Punjab.
for Respondent No. 2:Mr. R.S. Rai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Abhinav Sood, Advocate; Ms. Rubina, Advocate and Mr. Anmol, Advocate with respondent No.2 in person and alleged detenue in person.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227 - Writ of Habeas Corpus - Petition filed to release child from alleged illegal custody - Respondent No. 2, the child's mother, retains physical custody following divorce proceedings - The petitioner failed to disclose material facts, including waiving visitation rights in sworn affidavits - Court emphasizes that litigants must approach the court with clean hands and full disclosure of relevant facts - The child's well-being and stable environment are paramount. (Paras 26, 30)
(B) Legal Principles - It is established that non-disclosure or concealment of material facts can lead to dismissal of the petition; a party approaching the court must not only be truthful but also disclose all pertinent issues and documents. (Paras 18, 36)
(C) The court noted that the child is not in illegal detention as he is in the care of his mother and is safe, thus rendering the petition not maintainable. (Paras 29, 31)
Findings of Court:
The petition is dismissed due to the petitioner's concealment of material facts and the lack of evidence of the child’s illegal detention.
Result: Petition dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments of petitioner and respondent (Para 4 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. court’s observations on concealment (Para 14 , 15 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 4. maintainability of the petition (Para 25 , 29) |
| 5. conclusion and order of the court (Para 30 , 31 , 32) |
JUDGMENT
Mr. Alok Jain, J.
The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in nature of Habeas Corpus, seeking release of the alleged detenue Sidak Veer Singh, aged about 05 years being son of the petitioner, alleging him to be in the illegal custody of respondent No.2.
2. That the brief facts as narrated by the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner are narrated in the chart below: -
| Date | Event | Relevant Annexure | Remark |
| 21.03.2016 | Petitioner no. 1 &Respondent no. 2 got married. | Nil | Admitted by both the parties. |
| 06.02.2017 | Son-Sidak Veer Singh bom to the parties. | Nil | Admitted by both the parties. |
| 02.10.2017 | Both the parties got separated and the child remains in the custody of respondent no. 2. | Nil | Admitted by both the parties. |
| 24.04.2021 | Parties compromised to resolve all the matrimonial dispute and executed a compromise. | P-2 | Admitted by both the parties. |
| 26.07.2021 | Petition under Section 13(B) of HMA is filed by the parties jointly. | Attached with P-1 | Admitted by both the parties. |
| 19.08.2021 | Parties filed an application for condonation of the statutory period. | Nil | Admitted by both the parties. |
| 26.08.2021 | Parties filed their affidavits dated 19.08.2021 as statements of Second Motion whereby the petitioner waived off his right of visitation. | R-2/7 & R-2/8 | Respondent No. 2 alleges concealment of this material document. |
| 27.08.2021 | Divorce granted by Family Court, Ludhiana. | P-1 | Admitted by both the parties. |
3. Subsequent thereto the petitioner, issued a legal notice on 22.10.2021 and also a representation on 07.07.2022 (Annexure P-3) and sought his visitation right and meeting with the alleged detenue, which has not been responded and replied.
4. It is submitted by the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner that the detenue is in illegal custody of respondent no. 2, and hence, petitioner having left with no other speedy and efficacious remedy, therefore, sought the release of minor child by filing the present petition.
5. That this Hon'ble Court passed the following order on 02.06.2023, which reads as under: -
"On request of learned counsel for the parties, adjourned to 07.07.2023.
Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for respondent No. 2 are ad-idem and have mutually agreed that on the next date of hearing i.e. 07.07.2023, alleged detenue namely Sidak Veer, would be brought in the Mediation and conciliation Centre of this Court or Child Counselling Centre of this Court, by his mother-respondent No.2 and child would be allowed to have meeting freely with petitioner for a sufficient period of time, in a separate room at 11.00 am, without there being any disturbance during meeting.
It is made clear that said meeting is arranged as an interim measure only, without effecting or prejudicing the rights of either side."
6. In compliance of the above order dated 02.06.2023, the matter was called in the first round at 11:00A.M. on 07.07.2023, and the parties were directed to go to the Mediation Centre and the petitioner was permitted to meet the child.
7. The matter was again taken up at 02:30 PM on 07.07.2023 and the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner very fairly submitted that the petitioner (who is present in person) met the detenue. Thereafter, the matter has been argued at length.
8. The learned Senior counsel for the respondent No.2 at the outset has raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner has concealed a material fact and a document i.e. Annexure R-2/7 & R-2/8 whereby the parties have submitted on
