The High Court should refrain from intervening in custody matters under habeas corpus jurisdiction when an effective statutory remedy exists, emphasizing the welfare of the child as paramount.

SUMEET GOEL, J.

The petition in hand filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India , in essence, is aimed at directing respondent No.4 (father of the child in question) to hand over the custody of a minor child aged about 04 years to the petitioner (mother of the child in question).

2. Shorn of non-essential details, the relevant factual matrix of the lis in hand is adumbrated, thus:

(i) The petitioner-mother and respondent No.4-father were married on 05.11.2019 in accordance with Sikh rites and rituals. One male child (hereinafter referred to as ‘child in question’) was born on 26.08.2021 and is currently aged about 04 years.

(ii) Respondent No.4-father had filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as ‘ HMA ’) for dissolution of marriage between him and the petitioner-mother, in January 2024, wherein, the petitioner-mother (herein) had filed an application for visitation rights. However, the main petition for grant of divorce was withdrawn on 21.05.2024 by respondent No.4-father.

(iii) The petitioner-mother is stated to have filed a petition under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as ‘DV Act’) wherein, an application preferred by her, for issuance of direction to respondent No.4-father (herein) to allow her to meet the child in question was declined on 11.02.2025. It is common ground between the counsel for rival parties that the said order has not been challenged till date.

(iv) The petitioner-mother has also instituted an application under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 (hereinafter referred to as ‘GW Act’) for seeking custody of the child in question from respondent No.4-father (herein) in January 2025, which is still pending adjudication.

(v) This Court has been accordingly petitioned, by way of the petition in hand, on the premise that the petitioner–mother is entitled to have custody of the child in question and respondent No.4–father is in illegal/wrongful custody of the child in question.

Rival Submissions

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-mother has argued that the child in question was born on 26.08.2021 and is currently aged only about 04 years and, therefore, welfare of the child in question as also the mandate of law necessitates that custody of the child in question should be with the petitioner. Learned counsel has urged that the petitioner-mother, on account of ill treatment at the hands of respondent No.4-father and his family members, was constrained to leave the matrimonial home and the atmosphere prevailing in the house of respondent No.4 – father is not congenial for upbringing of minor child in question. Learned counsel has iterated that respondent No.4 – father is indulging in illicit relations with women and is habitual of taking drugs/ intoxicants. On the strength of these submissions, grant of petition in hand, is entreated for.

4. A status report by way of an affidavit dated 24.06.2025 of Rupinder Kaur, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub division Dirba on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 has been filed. Learned State counsel has raised submissions in tandem with the said status report.

However, keeping in view the nature of lis in hand, this Court finds that, primarily, it is contest for custody of the child in question between the petitioner-mother & the respondent No.4 - father and, thus, the State of Punjab is not a contesting party.

5. Learned counsel appearing on beha