K. LAKSHMAN, P. SREE SUDHA
Santosh Raj Dulam – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. custody disputes arise from international context. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. counterarguments regarding jurisdiction and custody. (Para 7) |
| 3. legal standards for child custody and habeas corpus. (Para 8 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 17 , 18 , 20 , 21 , 30 , 31) |
| 4. habeas corpus and intervention in child custody. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 19) |
| 5. welfare of the child as paramount consideration. (Para 22 , 23 , 27 , 28) |
| 6. doctrine of comity and first strike in custody matters. (Para 33 , 34 , 39 , 40) |
| 7. court's decision on custody pending ongoing proceedings. (Para 42 , 44 , 49 , 50) |
| 8. final disposition regarding custody and visitation rights. (Para 52 , 53) |
ORDER :
K. LAKSHMAN, J.
Heard Mr. Imran Khan, learned Senior Counsel, representing Mr.Pramod Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Special Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 4, and Mr. H. Venugopal, learned Senior Counsel, representing Mr.Ravi Kumar Vadlakonda, learned counsel for 5th respondent.
2. This writ petition is filed to direct respondent Nos.2 to 4 to produce his minor son Divith Dulam, a US citizen by birth, holding US Passport bearing No.643488993, currently residing at Hanumakonda, from the ille
Dhanwanti Joshi Vs. Madhav Unde
Gaurav Nagpal vs Sumedha Nagpal
Elizabeth Dinshaw Vs. Arvind M. Dilshaw
Kanu Sanyal Vs. District Magistrate, Darjeeling
Lahari Sakhamuri Vs. Sobhan Kodali
Mrs. Kanika Goel vs The State Of Delhi
Mohammad Vikram Hussain Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Nilanjan Bhattacharya Vs. State of Karnataka
Nithya Anand Raghavan vs. State of NCT of Delhi
Sarita Sharma Vs. Sushil Sharma
Shilpa Aggarwal vs Aviral Mittal
Tejaswini Gaud vs Shekhar Jagdish Prasad Tewari
The welfare of the child is paramount in custody matters, allowing writ of habeas corpus to challenge unlawful detention in international contexts. Foreign court orders must yield if they conflict wi....
The welfare of the child is the paramount consideration in custody disputes, with habeas corpus requiring proof of illegal custody and availability of remedies, which were absent in this case.
The welfare of the child is paramount in custody disputes, and custody should be granted to the parent if it serves the child's best interests.
The welfare of a minor child is of paramount importance, and custody should generally remain with the mother unless proven harmful, reaffirming the 'tender years rule.'
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.