Back
YOGENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Mithilesh Maurya – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J.
1. Heard Sri Sandeep Srivastava holding brief of Ms. Hemlata Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A.-I appearing for the State-respondents and Sri Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6.
2. Submission of the counsel for the petitioners and also the case set up in the petition is to the effect that the respondent No. 4, who is the wife of the petitioner No. 1, left her matrimonial home on 19.8.2018 alongwith the petitioner No. 2 (corpus), an infant of age about one month at that point of time.
3. Proceedings under Sections 9 and 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA), maintenance proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (the CrPC), and also a criminal case are stated to be pending between the parties.
4. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the only relief that he seeks to press in the present petition is for grant of visitation rights.
5. Counsel for the State-respondents and also the counsel for the contesting respondent No. 4 submit that since the relief sought in the present petition is confined to grant of visitation ri
The court ruled that visitation rights cannot be claimed through habeas corpus when custody is lawful and family court proceedings are ongoing.
Point of law: Custody of child – Unlawful and illegal custody - A writ of habeas corpus, as has been consistently held, though a writ of right is not to be issued as a matter of course, particularly ....
Point of law: Custody of child - In a child custody matter, a writ of habeas corpus would be entertainable where it is established that the detention of the minor child by the parent or others is ill....
Point of Law : It is only in exceptional cases, the rights of the parties to the custody of the minor will be determined in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction on a petition for habeas corpus.
Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 provides for custody of children and declares that in any proceeding under the said Act, the Court could make, from time to time, such interim orders as it ....
The welfare of the child is paramount in custody matters, and the extraordinary jurisdiction for habeas corpus depends on establishing unlawful detention.
The High Court retains discretion to grant habeas corpus for custody, yet it cannot disrupt prior lawful custody orders, emphasizing child welfare as paramount.
Custody of minor children - Natural guardian - Private respondent is none other than biological mother of minor children - It may be presumed that custody of children with their mother is not unlawfu....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
